Good morning. Today we have some nice rain. And we've had it now for several days. And actually the rain began the day the war ended. And you know that in the Bible, or in the Torah as Jews call it, it says that rain is a blessing. And it's a blessing which is a function of our interaction with the power or wisdom that organizes the universe.

[01:04]

And the Lotus Sutra also uses the metaphor of rain to describe the Dharma. So the Dharma is like rain that falls indiscriminately upon all beings. And each plant or bush or tree or flower gets nurtured by this rain and assimilates this rain each in its own way and nurturing its own growth and development according to their own nature. So they oversee the same water. The water is the same, but each form is different. And the same water is nurturing all the different life forms in the same way.

[02:11]

Water also allows us to live and eat, because all the things that we eat also have to use water, and allows us to bathe and function in the world. And water is also a metaphor for the Dharma because ultimately the Dharma is the water that can fully satiate our innermost thirst. So we should talk about our desire. And there are several levels to desire. So sometimes, dualistically, we talk as if there were two kinds of desire, you know, a spiritual desire and a material desire. And in the Four Vows of the Bodhisattva, we used to vow to put an end to all desire, and now it's to all delusions.

[03:19]

But Suzuki Roshi used to talk about our inmost desire, or inmost request, So it's really the same desire. It's not like there's a spiritual desire and a material desire or a physical desire. It's just that the Dharma is what is able to really satiate that desire which otherwise with the forms of the world appears to be insatiable or inexhaustible because none of the forms is really it. So in Zazen we find the it that our desire is about. You know, the last time that it rained before this series of showers began was also on a Saturday. And the night before, I had prayed for some rain as part of the Sabbath evening prayers.

[04:31]

And lo and behold, it rained the next day. Nell says that the forecast hadn't announced it. I don't know. Maybe coincidence. But it was interesting that that same day I came to a morning program and Nell talked about this koan number 17 of the Mulan Khan which is I think it's called The National Teacher Calls Three Times. But the whole subject of the koan is the question of calling and response. And it's sort of representing a basic way of interaction and interdependence in the universe. I think that's the way that Noah was talking about it.

[05:32]

And I thought, well, this is a nice way of looking at the gate of prayer, this call and this response. You know, usually in Zen we don't pray that much, although some of our echos in the service say we pray for this and we pray for that, although other forms of Buddhism have prayer as a form of practice. And prayer is the sort of basic, you know, practice of Western religion, right? And yet there's a way in which Zazen and prayer are also the same thing. And yet they are different. And so when we pray, it's like opening the gateless gate for our own mind, for our own heart. And when we're praying, we're interacting with this wisdom that organizes the universe.

[06:44]

So then there's the call and the response, and this interaction, interdependence. But, you know, we do so, this calling is through the vehicle of our own self, through the vehicle of our own self. Like, sometimes we wonder, you know, people pray and wonder, well, you know, is this, what is this? I mean, does this make any sense? What am I talking to? Am I talking to myself? Or what is it that I'm talking to? And what am I talking about? So in a way, it's the self talking to the self. You know, in the West we usually think that the Absolute is not the Self, but is the Other. And actually both views are correct. Because the Self, what we call the Self, the true Self in Buddhism, is not our ordinary Self.

[07:54]

And most often we think of the self as our ordinary self, or our ego, or our mind, or our body. And actually from the perspective of this self, the small self, the true self, which is no-self, is really something other that is inconceivable to our ordinary mind. And yet, at the same time, it's something very close to us. So, what is it, this inconceivable self that cannot be reduced to anything, to our body or to our mind? You know, the case number 45 of the Mumonkans asks a variety of... a version of this question is, who is he?

[09:13]

I'll use the male pronoun. Who is he? It says, who is he that both Shakyamuni and Maitreya bow to for servants of And Luan says that if you see this he, what he's calling a he, relatively speaking of course, if you see him clearly, then it's like coming upon your own father in a crossroads. There's no doubt. There's a certainty. How wouldn't you recognize your own father in a crossroads? And you don't have to ask anybody else, you know, am I correct or incorrect in my perception. It's just right there, directly, immediately, intimately.

[10:14]

So, You could also see it as four different people arriving at a crossroads, each one coming from a different road, and all seemingly realizing, recognizing this person as their father. Deep inside you know this to be the case, but how can this be so? There are four different people that you don't recognize as your brother or sister are also recognizing this person as their father. So, it's like a dilemma. You can't be the father of the four. So, Well, who's the I and who's the other?

[11:20]

So, maybe our father had many wives, you know? Mother of many nations. And so all these four people could represent, you know, a Buddhist, or a Hindu, or a Jew, you know, or a Christian. But they're all very different and yet they're all recognizing this he as their own father. So what is it and what do we do? Is it the same or the other? And how do we allow the only true one to manifest for all those concerned? You know, most Dharma talks are usually centered around the first principle of sent practice.

[12:56]

This is the koan, what is it? And it has to do with wisdom or self-realization, realizing our own nature. And all the different koans are talking about the same subject. All seen from a different angle or a different perspective given a specific situation. But it's the same universal question over and over again. And the reason it's hard to talk about it and it's easy to miss the target is because unless we have a complete understanding of it fully, we really don't know what it is or how to talk about it. So whatever we say misses it.

[14:00]

But since it's fire that's seeking for fire, or it is wisdom that's seeking for wisdom, it's still possible to taste the water of the Dharma and be it, be that self, without really understanding it or fully knowing what it is, even though we don't have complete realization. because the dharma is found throughout the practice itself. So in zazen or in our bowing, in our chanting, in our daily practice, it's right there under our nose and under our feet. But it's very hard to talk about it because when we try to talk about it, then it's when we run into trouble and we get into dualistic ideas about it.

[15:12]

But when we're sitting in Zazen, we already are it. We are that before or beyond any words or description. Even though we don't understand it, we are it. So, you know, in one sense there's really nothing to talk about. That's why our practice is so silent. You know, we spend most of the time that we practice together in a silent way. And then we have these, you know, lectures Which is, Mel always says, you know, that Suzuki Roshi used to tell him that it's actually a mistake. So what I'm doing now is already a mistake, and I'm wrong.

[16:17]

And you should hit me for it. I'm already transgressing. you know, nonetheless we have to talk, you know, we have to transgress and we have to live within the world of duality and find our way in the mud. So, you know, this first principle of being yet completely has remained the same since the time of Shakyamuni Buddha. and has been transmitted from generation to generation, from teacher to disciple and so on.

[17:19]

And regardless of all the different changing forms of history and culture and the development of civilization, right? because in a way we get kind of two angles or two perspectives. One is the lineage of the Dharma which appears the same, right? We chant the names of the patriarchs and it seems like, you know, it's the same thing that we're doing now. There's no difference. And yet if we looked at the actual social circumstances that each one of these patriarchs lived in, it would be completely different worlds they were living in than the one we live now. So, you know, they maybe were walking on a dirt road, you know, and practicing, you know, this is it. This is it. I am this.

[18:22]

And now we're riding on a car on a freeway, you know, saying, this is it, I am this. This is the car, this is the road. You know, the essential purpose of zazen remains the same throughout the ages, but the Dharma appears in different forms according to the social and historical context. And this social context in which the Dharma appears has to do with what in Buddhism we call samsara. or the world of desire and the world of form. And we say that there's nirvana within samsara.

[19:36]

because it's our desires that lead us to drink, to seek the water of the Dharma. It's that basic thirst that we have that brings us into the Dharma. And there's also nirvana in samsara in the sense that the social laws and the forms out there in the society that we live are also similar in some ways to the laws and forms of the Dharma. And that's why you've had different cooperations and different relationships between the dharma and the state. You know, the different koans that talk about teachers interacting with government officials and so on. The difference is that those You know, the social forms, in and by themselves, do not lead us to an understanding of form is emptiness and emptiness is form.

[20:39]

It has to do more with the duality of form is form and emptiness is emptiness. So, Buddhism is Buddhism and society is society. And yet, Buddhism is society and society is Buddhism. So the social forms, you know, and the laws of the society that we live in are kind of expressions of the second principle. You know, in Zen we talk about the first principle and the second principle. And the second principle has to do with scholarship and reason. Most of the books about Buddhism are talking about this second principle and the first principle being seen through the second principle.

[21:43]

And in a way, that's like society, because society is organized around this second principle. You know, it's the laws of reason. You know, and we have the Dharma now that's appearing in our so-called modern scientific world. So this scientific world began to sort of take shape about 200 years ago, right? And with the development of science and what was called the Enlightenment of the West, right? Not enlightenment in the Buddhist sense, but that's how they called the whole movement that tried to get away from religion and establish the modern world and the secular world.

[22:48]

And actually, science had to break away from religion in order to be able to establish itself. And what I'm leading this to is sort of the relationship between science and Buddhism or the secular world and the traditional world that we live in. I mean, we're always kind of migrating between these two worlds, right? We come into the Zen Dove and we come into this traditional world, right? Some of us wear robes and shave our heads and put on this kind of traditional way of life. And then we migrate outside. We go outside and we are interacting with the modern world, right? Go to a job and so on and have to use and live within all these modern sort of forms. And sometimes it's hard to do that.

[23:57]

you know, because the two kind of seem somewhat in conflict. Or when you try to explain to your co-workers, you know, what Buddhism is or what Zazen is, sometimes it's very difficult. It's very difficult for people to understand. And it's difficult to understand because a big part of the secular world has been established on the basis of a kind of a reaction or rejection of religion, at least of Western religion, right? Because you weren't supposed to do certain kinds of research because it was against the church and we all know about Copernicus and all of that because he said that the world, you know, the earth rotated around the sun instead of the sun rotating around us, around the earth.

[25:02]

And he got into a lot of trouble for doing that, for saying that. And so there was a big battle between religion and science. And actually people came to see science as a more valid way than religion. So that's still somewhat in the tension between when we're communicating between these two worlds. And a lot of people don't want to have anything to do with religion and do see it as a kind of a primitive kind of practice. It's interesting, though, that the Enlightenment not only was a rejection of religion, but it was also an attempt to transform it.

[26:05]

And I'm talking about in the West, in Western history. And many of the The things that people wanted to change about religion, in a way, have a lot to do with Buddhism. So in a way, the ground was fertile for Buddhism to come into the West like, you know, a glove fitting perfectly into a hand, like made to shape. Because people wanted a religion that was more tolerant, was more tolerant of diversity, wanted to shift the focus from the transcendent of God to the immanence of God instead of focusing on metaphysical speculations. I mean, a lot of theology, I mean, a lot of monks, you know, in the Christian tradition and a lot of scholars in the Jewish tradition spent most of their day studying and sort of speculating about the nature of God, right?

[27:08]

So people want to get away from that and focus more on the self. And then also democracy came up as a new form of society that replaced a strict hierarchy and authoritarian kind of structures which were true both of the government and of the church. And now we all are living part of that. I mean, we all want a kind of practice, kind of Buddhism that's non-hierarchical, that is democratic. And we want a religion that's not dogmatic or fanatic, you know, which was part of the criticism of religion by science, was that religion was dogmatic and fanatic, didn't tolerate differences. And also that doubt was seen as a kind of a negative thing.

[28:19]

You know, you're not supposed to have doubt because if you have doubt then it's a threat to your faith. And how can you have faith if you're plagued with doubt? Whereas doubt for scientists is a good thing because they want to have doubt because the doubt is leading them to new discoveries and to the truth. So doubt is welcomed and actually what's rejected is dogma. And in a way in Zen also we reject dogma and welcome doubt. And we talk about the great doubt as being something understand our self-nature. So I think we're living this whole process as part of what we practice here of this relationship between the modern world and tradition and the relationship between men and women and both in authority and

[29:31]

those under authority, under those in authority. And we're always discussing these issues, you know, about male and how much authority he has, or how much we can say, and issues of men and women, and so on and so forth. So actually, this is a process that started 200 years ago. And it's how the dharma is interpenetrated with the history and the process of society. You know, and in the last 20 years we've been witnessing a kind of a revival of religion and as a kind of natural outcome of the 60s and also as a reaction against the 60s in terms of like fundamentalism.

[30:38]

And a lot of disenchantment I think also that people had in possibility of transforming the world politically. That was a big part of the whole kind of Marxist worldview, part of that kind of move towards science and rejection of religion, and thinking, well, the real practice is not sitting idly, you know, doing nothing, but going out there and doing things for people. And the way to do things for people is to change the society. And actually, that's been somewhat of a failure, that worldview. Not completely, obviously, there are seeds of truth in that. But I think people have been somewhat disenchanted by the possibility of transforming the world politically and all that's involved in politics, right? Because politics is full of that kind of duality of the world.

[31:44]

these two sides, the left and the right, and, you know, and anger and the hatred and the, you know, the justice and the injustice and all of that. So it's kind of like being right in the middle of that confusion of the world. So people are turning to different forms of spiritual practice as a way of looking for this transformation. There are a lot of words.

[33:01]

But I think it's also necessary to talk about this side of practice. But it's hard to do it, you know, non-dualistically and without getting too much into your head and staying with it. And when we stay with the koans, it's always very close to the actual practice that we do. And yet, nonetheless, we live in this world and we're all concerned. The last thing I wanted to talk about along this same line is the whole question of, which is part of this conflict between religion and the modern world, the question of orthodoxy and fundamentalism.

[34:19]

since part of this kind of revival of religion, which in a way is an homogeneous movement, that people are coming up with statistics and all of that, right? But at the same time, it's kind of heterogeneous, and there are many different trends to it. And we're kind of part of it, but Zen usually is seen as a kind of New Age religion, you know, when people in books refer to Zen, they usually call it a New Age religion, you know, although we don't see ourselves as New Age. Because, actually, we're not New Age because, you know, it's a very ancient religion, you know, as couple of, you know, 2,000 year history, 2,000 years, 500 years history. And we have a whole tradition and a whole lineage. So it's not something, some kind of new movement or cult that's coming up at this time.

[35:29]

And actually that's what keeps it kind of keeps the authenticity of the practice is that helps keep the authenticity of the practice the fact that we do have this kind of lineage. And we have a spiritual head, you know, to keep us all kind of from going off into all these different delusions about what it is. So, and yet many people who are practicing religion nowadays, they do it with a kind of, either in this kind of new age mode or on this fundamentalist mode. And sometimes it's hard to separate a little

[36:33]

And some people think actually also, not only that Zen is New Age, but Zen is very fundamentalist, very serious, very orthodox. But there's a difference between the orthodoxy and the fundamentalist attitude. In Buddhism, we call that the difference between the Mahayana and the Hinayana vehicle. Actually, the Mahayana vehicle can also be very orthodox in its appearance. So one thing is the appearance and the traditionalism and the other thing is the spirit with which those forms are carried. So you can have a very Mahayana spirit with a very traditional appearance.

[37:43]

But for some people that seems very orthodox and sort of very uptight or boring or old-fashioned and so on and so forth. You know, which is like a lot of young people in Japan, that's how they look at Zen, right? And they can't understand that they're trying to be, you know, all American or modern, right? And then there are these Americans who are, you know, in the 60s and were doing drugs and all that, you know. They got this very traditional way of life that to them is sort of what they're trying to get away from. GROWLS But what happens is, it's also, I think, a mistake that a lot of people sort of, because of confusing the orthodoxy with the fundamentalism, they reject sort of a traditional way, you know, and then end up with a kind of very superficial, maybe that's a judgment on my part, spirituality.

[38:54]

You know, or a spirituality that's kind of very watered down. uh... so the fundamentalism has to do not so much with the tradition but with the attitude And it's kind of an attitude towards how do we relate to what we conceive as being good and evil. And sometimes, you know, in this, sometimes I can appreciate also these fundamentalist groups. I mean, sometimes like, for example, very orthodox Jews, you know, have this combination of

[39:58]

you know, very sort of committed and spirited and kind of very inspiring kind of practice. And at the same time, there's this kind of fundamentalist attitude. And I think that's not only the case for Jews, but also for Christians, you know, the whole fundamentalist movement within Christianity. And the basic, I think that the basic problem there is that the way that we conceive our righteousness and how we're trying to, how do we relate to what we're trying to transform, or the evil that we conceive. So that in the fundamentalist mode, for example, in order to be righteous, you have to kind of hate evil. And if you're tolerant of evil, then it must mean that you love it at some level, or that you like it.

[41:08]

So, and then when you hate evil, then you end up, you know, persecuting heretics and people who don't conform to the traditions, people who don't dress the way you dress, people who don't, you know, do this, do that the way you do. Because people don't adapt to the forms that your practice has, then, you know, they fall kind of outside So in Buddhism, in the Mahayana spirit, we don't hate the world, and not hating the world means not hating people who are different than we are, and also not hating the evil within our own mind. And I think that allows, that makes it much easier to transition between these two worlds, you know, between the modern world and between the traditional world, between our practice in the zendo and our practice outside the zendo with our family, with our work, with our jobs, et cetera.

[42:43]

So it allows kind of, it's the kind of attitude that allows for a reconciliation of samsara and divana. So actually the point is not so much to hate evil or to try to avoid it, but to not be attached to it. And if you hate evil or you hate people who don't do the things the way you think they should be done, whether it be in regards to morality or sexuality or abortion or whatever, you become actually very attached to that. You become very attached to that very thing that you're hating, and actually you become a vehicle for that evil. So in hating that evil, because you're trying to be good, you actually become a vehicle for that evil.

[43:48]

So you have that kind of a, you know, like those metaphor of the, a demon and a monk being the same, being the same thing. Suzuki Roshi used to call it controlling your cows by giving them a wide field in which to roam in. So you allow your thoughts to come and go, you allow yourself to be immersed in the midst of people that are different than you, who might not be Buddhists or who might not practice Zazen, and you might not even tell them about Zazen or Buddhism, but just in the way that you interact with them, that helps them and helps you, because there's no division between you and other people.

[45:06]

And that's one of the ways to express the Bodhisattva spirit. And May also talks about this example that Sugiroshi used to give of if an uninvited guest appeared to your house, you let him in, but you don't serve him tea. So if greed, hate and delusion arises in our mind, you know, we let it come in, we don't try to close the door, because if we close the door, greed, hate and delusion then starts banging the door and trying to knock it down, and probably will knock it down. So, you let it come in, but we know that it's greed, hate and delusion. So, and that's actually how we practice together because when we're practicing you know just as when we're sitting zazen or we're interacting with one another like in in the sangha great hate and delusion arises just like great hate and delusion arises when we're sitting zazen and we notice it

[46:30]

but we don't invite it to tea, meaning we don't act on it, you know, we just say, this is delusion. So somebody does something that we don't like or tells us something that we don't like and we feel hate and we feel anger. And we go into all these deluded views about, you know, why are they doing this? They must be doing it because they have, you know, an axe to grind or, you know, they're really trying to put me down or I feel really humiliated by this or that. And we go on into this whole explanations about why is this the case and who this person is and who I am and so on and so forth. And So we practice it with that, we just let it come and go, and eventually it goes. And we just have to know to be able to, within that delusion, to remain established in the Dharma, because it is what eventually remains.

[47:40]

You know, all those delusions come and go. And if we hate them and we start fighting them and become obsessed with them, then we just fall more and more into their grip. And that's kind of the fundamentalist mistake. It's the same like how do we fight egoism, the egoism within ourselves. And a lot of the traditional Jewish and Christian prescriptions were like, well, you have to see yourself as you're really nothing and find yourself depicted

[48:45]

Hit yourself. But that's kind of just another, that's just negative ego, right? Oh, I'm really nothing. Oh, I'm so bad. Oh, I'll never be able to do anything. They're so good, and I'm so bad. And that's just still ego. So, if we hate our egoism too much, then we're still, you know, with an ego. But if we're not aware of it, then we're just in delusion.

[49:57]

So how do we recognize our flaws and our problems as they arise, moment to moment, and yet remain established within the Dharma? And by recognizing, you know, the greed, hate, and delusion, but without hating it, then we're able to use that in order to grow. So, I think that I've spoken enough. Maybe we'll open it for open discussion now and questions. Things you would like to say. Yes, Susan? When you pray for rain, who responds? I don't know.

[51:12]

What is it? You tell me. I don't know. I was wondering in line with her question, if the rain itself doesn't respond, if that's the response, it might be in the form of a cloud that doesn't empty.

[53:04]

somewhere where we can't see the formation of the cloud and moisturizing. I just say that because so often I myself look for something here and my view is narrow and I'm very specific. And because I'm looking so intently here, I'm unable to see the response here. If not the same form, I would want it because of my preferences. Right. So we don't see all the different ways in which we interact with everything. or how we do, or how what we do is having an effect, or how we're being responded to?

[54:17]

Yes, or how the universe, or the planet is doing it, even though we don't see it. Do you want to say more? Well, I was just thinking, well, I've been very attached to peace in the Middle East. And I was in Baghdad with a peace delegation in November. And the war has had a very human impact. face. And as the war has gone on, my heart is broken.

[55:30]

And it's been a lesson I've I feel great sorrow that it's happened, and that people are gone, and animals, and water. But there may be something I'm missing, in terms of just backing up. What is it you think you're missing? Well, I think my preferences hooked me to maybe be unable to see that some other thing is going on irrespective of my desire and that I can't

[56:44]

And I guess feel the grief, but not be so stuck in it. Yeah. And it's hard, you know, to not to take sides, you know, and to be able to see the regardless of whether it was necessary or unnecessary, you know, be able to see the pain of all the different sides and the concerns of all the different sides. And even if you are more on one side than the other, how not to hate the other side. And that's, I mean, even though because of some family connections and ties to Israel and all that that I have,

[58:00]

and I felt a natural kind of inclination in that way to be concerned with the safety of Israel and its cuts and all that and concerned with Saddam Hussein's threat to exterminate Israel and all that. I didn't allow myself to hate Saddam Hussein or the Iraqi people and to be able to see what their grievances are. Yes. I guess I don't see how you could not hate. I think you could enlighten yourself about what you're doing, if you hate. I hate George Bush. I'm not overly fond of Israel. I could try to talk myself out of it. I could enlighten myself about what I'm doing. But I really don't know how. I don't really think I could not hate. Well, I mean, that's part of what I was saying, that hate arises.

[59:04]

But then you say, this is great hate and delusion. So Haider writes, I hate, you know, Israelis, you know, or I hate Bush, you know. But then you say, and then, and then you, they're all your... explanations and reasons as to why you hate them, right? But that's also delusion because, you know, the other side has their side and their rationale, right? And their reasons and their justifications and so on. And so it's very hard to have that kind of balance, uh, equanimous mind that sees all sides, which would allow for the conflicts to be resolved, right? And that's because the world is a world of partiality and delusion, and we're part of that. So, you know, when that hate and that delusion arises, then we say, you know, you can't prevent that from arising, but that is great hate and delusion. So, in this moment, I may hate Saddam Hussein, but at the same time, I don't really hate

[60:13]

And this is where Zazen is helpful. The practice of Zazen helps you because you are able to develop that kind of non-dual mind or love or heart that is beyond these partialities of greed, hate and delusion that arise according to the comings and goings of the world. Yes? How do you find it helpful to compare one religious practice to another? Could you repeat the question? How do you find it helpful in your life to compare one religious practice to another? Well, just in being able to, you know, not find obstacles,

[61:18]

you know, as you move around the world and interact with different people and different customs and different traditions so that there can be some harmony within the differences and not erect these barriers or, you know, Buddhism or Judaism or Christianity or, you know, this custom or that custom or I wear this and you wear that and that sort of thing. I think about one more question.

[62:06]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ