Good morning. It gives me pleasure to introduce our speaker today, Peter Overton. Peter has been a long-time Zen student. Originally started practicing back in the 60s here at Berkley Zen Center, practiced at Tassajara and the city center. He was ordained as a priest in 1978, has been Chuso, and is a father, a husband, and currently is one of the teachers leading the aspects of practice period. So welcome, Peter. Thank you. Thank you. So I thought it would seem different to be sitting here in a chair rather than on a cushion, but it actually doesn't. I'm very surprised. I'm hoping that I'll find myself on a cushion again soon, but I'll just let that unfold as it will. So, as mentioned, we are in the middle of our aspects of practice period,

[01:05]

and the theme we've been exploring is the foundations of mindfulness in the Thursday night classes, and then other talks have been on the subject of various sutras from the Pali Canon. And last week we had a wonderful talk by Andrea on the sutra, I will not pretend that I remember the name, the Pitaka Satana Sutra, the Relaxation of Thoughts, and how to deal with distracting thoughts. And this week I'm going to talk about the Kakagopana Sutra, the simile of the saw. It follows the sutra that Andrea spoke about last week, and presents the ultimate distracting thought, which I'll get to in a little while. The sutra, as I read it, is about how we practice in the face of challenges or opposition,

[02:17]

whether for external circumstances or internal circumstances. And it's sort of along the lines of that wish expressed in the dedication we recite on certain mornings, in the morning service, where we say, May we continue our practice even in adversity. So this is sort of about, in some sense, the Buddha's response to the questions of how to practice when things are not good, and also how to practice when things are good. So he doesn't make too much distinction between good times and bad, but a number of examples are brought out which point to challenging circumstances. So the sutra starts out with a story, which I'm going to go through a little bit, because I think it's presented in a very cursory fashion in some sense,

[03:19]

but I think actually it's quite interesting the more you think about it. So I'm just going to read part of it. It starts off saying, Once monks, in the same savati, that is the city where he's actually speaking, there was a lady of a household named Vedahika. This good report about Lady Vedahika who had circulated, Lady Vedahika is gentle, Lady Vedahika is even-tempered. Lady Vedahika is calm. Now Lady Vedahika had a slave named Kali, who was diligent, deft, and neat in her work. Some translations use a different word. They don't say slave, they say servant. I have no idea really what's the most accurate translation into English, but I think we can assume that this was a relationship characterized by considerable distance in power, privilege, and so on. And the thought occurred to Kali, the slave,

[04:22]

This good report about my Lady Vedahika has circulated. Lady Vedahika is even-tempered. Lady Vedahika is gentle. Lady Vedahika is calm. Now, is anger present in my Lady without showing, or is it absent? Or is it just because I'm diligent, deft, and neat in my work, that the anger present in my Lady doesn't show? Why don't I test her? Of course, this kind of situation is familiar to all of us, particularly those of us who have children. But it's really, you know, here the servant wants to know. What's real here? Is this thought that my mistress is, you know, a really good person, that she has these wonderful qualities, that she exhibits these traits,

[05:24]

What's underneath? Is this really what's going on through and through here? So Kali decides to test her. So Kali, the slave, got up after daybreak, which I guess was a big no-no. And then Lady Vedahika said to her, Hey, Kali! Yes, madam. Why did you get up after daybreak? No reason, madam. No reason, you wicked slave. And yet you get up after daybreak? Angered and displeased, she scowled. Now, of course, you know, she might be, you know, it's probably true here. It seems like Kali's not being totally honest. You know, there was a reason why she got up. You know, probably a good reason why she got up after daybreak. She wanted to find out what was her mistress made of. And so the sutra goes on. Then the thought occurred to Kali. Anger is present in my lady, without showing, and not absent.

[06:28]

And it's just because I'm diligent, deft, and meek in my work that anger present in my lady doesn't show. Why don't I test her some more? So she does the same thing. And this time it would be the mistress says, No reason, you wicked slave. And yet you get up later in the day? Angered and displeased, she grumbled. First she scowls, then she grumbles. And Kali thinks to herself, Anger is present in my lady, without showing, and not absent. And it's just because I'm, anyway, why don't I test her again? So she does it again. It's not enough to test a person and get them sort of uncomfortable. You want them to have some expression, some evidence of what's real for them. And so she gets up late again.

[07:31]

And this time her mistress says, No reason, you wicked slave. And yet you get up even later in the day? Angered and displeased, she grabbed hold of a rolling pin, gave her a whack on the head, cutting it open. Then Kali, the slave with blood streaming from her cut-open head, went and denounced her mistress to the neighbors. See, ladies, the gentleman's handiwork? See, even the temperament's handiwork? And so on. And after that, an evil report about the epiphany circulated. And that's the end of the story. So it's taken me a while, I've actually been thinking about this for several weeks to figure out why this story is in here. So I'm going to come back to it. In the next paragraph, the Buddha says, In the same way, monks, a monk may be ever so gentle,

[08:32]

ever so even-tempered, ever so calm, as long as he is not touched by disagreeable aspects of speech. But it is only when disagreeable aspects of speech touch him that he can be truly known as gentle, even-tempered, and calm. There's a lot in there. What are disagreeable aspects of speech? You know, it's not just somebody giving you the finger when you cut them off on your car, or being short with you because you're confused about something. It's also hearing people make remarks to other people which seem hurtful or insensitive, or something that in some way, hearing other people speak in a way that

[09:35]

is hurtful to you because you know how what kind of suffering it's causing. People making remarks out of ignorance about things that people have no control over. The color of their skin, or their eyes, or their social background, that kind of thing. When you are touched by disagreeable aspects of speech, as the Buddha is trying to point out here, then you get a chance to find out what's inside of you, and how you can respond to and what is it that might make it possible for you to be truly known as gentle, even-tempered, and calm. So, here the Buddha goes on, and I want to come back to this actually, because I think this is a very small piece in this,

[10:38]

but I think it's also very important. The Buddha says, I don't call a monk easy to admonish. If he is easy to admonish, he makes himself easy to admonish, only by reason of sprobes, alms, food, lodging. In other words, only because the monk wants the requisites of a monk's life, which are alms and lodge food, robes, lodge food, lodging, and medicinal requisites. He goes on to say, if it's only because of those things, then when the monk doesn't get those things, which of course happens to monks, they are difficult to... they have a hard time with that. But he says, if a monk is easy to admonish, and makes himself easy to admonish, purely out of esteem for the Dharma, respect for the Dharma, reverence for the Dharma, then I call him easy to admonish. I will come back to that. And... So,

[11:47]

then the Buddhist talks about how monks, there are five aspects of speech by which others may address you. And these five aspects are touched upon in what the Buddha says about right speech, whether it's timely or untimely, true or false, affectionate or harsh, beneficial or unbeneficial, with a mind of goodwill or with a mind of inner hate. So any of these things can happen at any time. And what the Buddha instructs us to do in this given such an event. In any event, whether it's good or bad, you should train yourselves. Our minds will be unaffected, and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person's welfare, with a mind of goodwill,

[12:50]

and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him or her with an awareness imbued with goodwill. And beginning with him or her, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill, abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. That's how you should train yourselves. So, um, I think it's interesting that uh, the instruction does not say this is the way you should be. You should have, you should be in saying this is what you should aspire to. This is what you should train yourselves in. You should try this out. You should keep trying it out. the Buddha is not trying to posit an ideal state of mind

[13:52]

which you should then either fail to realize or not. He says try this practice out. It's a practice. Now, I think, uh, I just want to point out at this stage that while the Buddha gives various examples in the sutra of various things happening, the story about Leda Vejica talks about uh, situations where people are doing things that are really pointless, and what do you do in a situation like that? Such as, uh, suppose that a man were to come along carrying black, yellow, orbitant indigo and crimson and say, I will make pictures in space. I will make pictures appear. Now, what do you think? Would he draw pictures in space

[14:53]

and make pictures appear? In other words, I says, no, Lord. Why is that? Because space is formless and featureless. It is not easy to draw pictures and to make them appear. The man would reap only a share of weariness and disappointment. Um, so the Buddha gives various examples of that. And, um, and then comes to at the end the, uh, the simile of the saw for which the sutra is named. And, uh, this is where I, when I first started looking at this, I thought, this must be the rubber meets the road sutra. Uh, at the last, at the last example, the Buddha says, Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb from limb, with a two-handled saw,

[15:54]

I'm starting to picture it in those saws they used to cut down the redwoods, you know, one guy on either end, you know, just going at it, you know. Uh, he among you who would let his heart get angered, even at that, would not be doing my pity. Even if you were, even then, you should train yourselves. Our minds will be unaffected, we will say no evil words, we will remain sympathetic and with a mind of goodwill and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with goodwill. And beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill, abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill-will. That's how you should train yourselves. There's a passage in the Diamond Sutra

[16:59]

where the Buddha says, uh, when King Kali cut my limbs off and cut my flesh, uh, what did I do? Um, I, uh, I did not conceive of another being. Um, I did not conceive because if I conceived that there was another being present, something separate from myself, then that would just lead to thoughts about why are they doing this? They should not be doing this. What's wrong? This is the, um, and, uh, this instruction of the Buddha's in the sutra to me kind of has a similar depth and breadth of aspiration. Um, when you read it, it says, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing

[18:01]

world with an awareness imbued with good will, abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. This, in a way, is what's, um, possible. Uh, this is a, this is sort of the path of freedom when, uh, things get tough. It is to, uh, this provides an alternative to falling into, uh, uh, recriminations, uh, disappointment, um, depression. Uh, this is a, uh, an act of, uh, of, uh, uh, coming forward. This is an act of liberation. And, um, I think the context needs also

[19:01]

to be seen as just not only, uh, your social and political and, um, your community environment, but also, uh, your own, uh, psychological environment. Uh, when, uh, going back to, uh, Lady Bibbihika, um, what happens when you find yourself, uh, when you find yourself overwhelmed by, uh, uh, emotional reaction to, uh, something you've done. You have to kind of think about, um, uh, if you think, uh, attend with sympathy to the welfare of Lady Bibbihika in this story. How difficult this must be to have lost her temper, to have found that, uh, the way people think about her

[20:02]

and talk about her has changed utterly. Um, think about yourself in such a position, which certainly happens to all of us as we, uh, go along in life. We end up doing things we don't feel good about. And, um, we, uh, uh, we get down on ourselves. It's very difficult to crawl out of that hole sometimes. And so, uh, I personally have found this practice, uh, liberating to start beginning with myself, uh, to think a thought of goodwill, sympathetic to my own welfare, and expand that to people in my family, to people in my community, even to people I might see on television, where I often get, uh, very triggered when I turn on the TV. And I think, this person is speaking evil words, uh,

[21:03]

have those kinds of thoughts. How do I, uh, not get trapped in the, uh, go down the path of, uh, of, uh, self-righteous anger, basically, about it. And it's, it's very difficult, particularly in the political season. The, um, but I also think that, um, what the Buddha's prescribing here for us, or suggesting that we train in, uh, has a, I'm going to go back to this section on, on, uh, the Buddha talking about, uh, how monks are easy to admonish. I think what the Buddha's concerned about here is whether or not, um, uh, the monks or practitioners can hear the teaching. What, uh, what, with what mind

[22:04]

do we approach or open ourselves to the teaching? And, um, what, um, you know, uh, I think what he's saying is, uh, when he says, dust monks, you should train yourselves. We will be easy to admonish and make ourselves easy to admonish purely out of esteem for the Dharma, respect for the Dharma, reverence for the Dharma. That's how you should train yourselves. Um, he makes this point, but I think that the, uh, the other suggestion he makes goes into a longer length about, um, um, holding, uh, being sympathetic to the welfare of others and to yourself, um, is also contained there, is also implied there, and that if you, um, follow this instruction, train in this way, you will find it easier to hear

[23:07]

the Dharma. And by that, uh, to hear the truth, uh, contained within, uh, the, uh, the truth contained within the evil words of others. The, uh, uh, on Thursday we had, uh, um, um, a lecture here by, um, esteemed Japanese monk, I can't remember his name. Juko, Reverend Juko Nakano. Yeah, Reverend Juko Nakano, who, uh, talked, um, uh, about various things, but he, um, at one point he talked about how when you ask for the kiyosaka, or the stick, and you get the stick, then all of the distracting thoughts and everything that's, you know, uh, involving you and all kinds of conflict and confusion, that just

[24:08]

disappears. And, uh, I was tempted to ask him, um, what is it, how can we accept the really difficult things that come up in our lives with that same spirit? Uh, with the spirit of, okay, I've just, you know, it just, sometimes, you know, you know, an example of that is you, you're walking down the street, whatever is going on, you trip and you fall on your face. And suddenly, you wake up. You know, what was I doing there? Uh, um, you, uh, you get through the checkout line and you suddenly realize you've been rude to the person who was, uh, giving you the change for your groceries. What was I doing there? Uh, those kinds of, um, instances where you come awake suddenly. Uh, and, uh, but we often find ourselves

[25:09]

confused and agitated in those circumstances. So what, uh, what can we do? And I, and I actually think that this, this instruction is, can be very useful. Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person's welfare with a mind of goodwill and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading him with a awareness imbued with goodwill and beginning with him or her, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with goodwill and equal to space, abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from non-will-will. There are so many things

[26:21]

here that are very interesting. Even in this instruction, where the first line is we will say no evil words. So what, uh, are evil words? Um, in the, um, ceremony we just, uh, participated in the, uh, full moon ceremony. I was, uh, uh, I came a little bit late and I, uh, and I, uh, didn't know whether it would be room for me to enter and not be getting on my knees because I have kind of a disability right now. I participated in the ceremony out there. And, uh, and the three pure precepts, reciting those, we refrain from evil, we do all that is good, we live and are lived for the benefit of all beings. So we refrain from evil.

[27:23]

We refrain from what is, um, born out of ignorance of our actual nature. Ignorance of the fact that everything is changing constantly. Um, and on top of that a kind of almost willful, a willful ignorance of what is, um, uh, the relationship between our, uh, our consciousness and our actions. And then, um, but it's, and it's interesting that the three precepts, the pure precepts have two sides and then a third. doing all that is good is not quite the same as refraining from evil.

[28:24]

And yet, when we refrain from evil, doing what is good arises spontaneously. When we do what is good, uh, it is easy to avoid doing what is evil. Uh, you know, acting out of ignorance. Uh, and yet, we take it a step further to say to live and be lived for the benefit of all beings that, uh, we can't, we can't just come down on one side or the other of these things that to do them all, it goes beyond doing good or evil. What time is it going to be? Time is about seven o'clock. So,

[29:41]

just go a little further in this teaching. Uh, our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic to that person's welfare. I'm not exactly sure how this is translated, and yet, um, the way I read it is we will remain, we will, we will, we will imagine how that person's welfare is the same as our own. That their welfare is no different than ours. And, a person's welfare with a mind of goodwill and with no inner hate. So, it kind of, this sort of tells you something about what it means to remain sympathetic to someone's welfare. Is that it's a a mind of generosity and forgiveness

[30:44]

and with no inner hate. Not holding something back in ignorance, not holding some view of them which is other than generous and with goodwill. And we will keep pervading him or her with an awareness imbued with goodwill holding that intention. And then, beginning with that, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world to go beyond that person to see how to take that generosity and goodwill and give it to everyone. This is how we should train ourselves. So with that,

[31:45]

I think I'm going to stop, and I'd like to hear anything that anyone wishes to say. Hossam, do you have any words that you'd like to add? I had an observation and a couple things. First of all, this story is extremely interesting. It seems to me like the story of Job turned inside out. And I wonder about I think we're supposed to just accept the motivation of the servant. But, you know, certainly one can question what she was about in revealing this. I don't want to get into discussing that. The real pressing question is how do you cultivate this? How do you do this practice? Not what are the values, but how do you actually, when afflicted thoughts or self-centered thoughts or so-called evil thoughts, how do you

[32:48]

purify yourself? I hate that word. So that, I mean, I'm not being formal, but to stop them from arising, what's the process by which you do that and what's the process by which you respond when the kernels of these thoughts arise? Well, what you say, one idea might be that with respect to I think if we look at the instruction, so first the instruction is just hold on. Create some space here. Don't react. Don't say, gee, that was really wonderful. Jump on somebody

[33:49]

and say that's, you know, or don't say something bad. And then really think about their welfare or really think about your own. If you're coming down on yourself, if it's an internal reaction that you're dealing with, really think about if that's the context or the frame of reference you're dealing with, either one, external or internal, really think about just trust that you can really land on what that person's welfare is most important and to remain there. I think it requires trust. Yes. So if we're in a situation where somebody has insulted us or hurt our ego, then it's easy for us to see

[34:49]

how this practice is a good one to identify with their welfare rather than with our own ego, which might cause us to lash out at them, but let's go to the story of the saw. Yes. That's a different kind of situation where somebody, I mean, that kind of story in Buddhism or Gandhi or whoever can give the impression that it's advising you to be passive and totally accepting of horrendous violence. You can take it that way. Yes. So I would like to raise a problem about that. Oh, I can respond. Yeah. I'm about to respond. I'll give you a chance, like 20 seconds. So it might be, if somebody was sawing me in half

[35:50]

or raping my daughter, something like that, maybe without wishing them evil or even wishing for their welfare, I might take a really big two-by-four and crack their head open or, you know, crack them hard and escape or free the person that was being attacked. Do you think that would be appropriate? I think there's... Where does it come from? That's it. If I... Let's talk about that now. Where does that come from? So when I was thinking about the simile of the saw, I did a little role play inside myself. I think it's sort of like, oh, you guys are going to cut me in half? Oh. Oh. Boy, I bet that's going to hurt. Wow. You know, where I went with this was

[36:51]

that in that situation, what compassion means is that you are present with these people. How can you bring presence with these people to the situation? Oh, no big thing for you. You guys do this for a living? Wow. Now, you know, I know this is... I'm only getting one chance at this. So I really want to do this right. I'm going to give it everything I've got here, and I want you to... I would really like you to do it... Just give it your all because I'm going to be here for that. Anyway, to show up with... in the situation, with the people. And that might mean, you know, whack! Wake up! What are you doing? You know? There's someone... Someone is being damaged here. Wake up! It could look like that. Or it could look like, you guys have got that big saw. What? Wow.

[37:53]

So the question is, where does that action proceed from? And it's very challenging. And I think this is where... When I was reading this, this is what... This is the mind that the Buddha would like to encounter when the Buddha wants to offer the Dharma to you. You know, with the Buddha. Not just by yourself, but with each other. Does that respond? Yes. Yes? I don't remember the details, but there was a monk in recent times who was imprisoned in Asia, and when they were released, they were very badly abused. And they were asked what was the worst thing that happened or arose

[38:54]

for you, and the response was worse to the effect of, I was afraid I would lose sympathy or compassion for the... Yeah, because what happens when you lose sympathy or compassion? That was the worst thing. That's like really being in prison. And the other thought that came to mind was something from the 1960s, where the quintessential question for people requesting CO status was, if you're sitting and your grandmother is being raped within view, and there's a gun within reach, what would you do? And it's a real... So how do you answer that question? It stayed with me. I don't have a clear answer. However, I do have a question, which was you used the phrase regarding self-righteous anger. So I think in the context of these questions, these issues and these examples, is there righteous anger? Is there righteous anger?

[39:54]

That's a righteous anger. Where does righteous anger fall into? Well, let's see, that's an interesting question. I think there is. But I think I'm going to qualify that word righteous as not... as holding the rightness, the uprightness of everyone. Just holding the uprightness of everyone in the situation, no matter how you conceive the situation. Yeah. Justice meaning to set things upright. I think we're next. Oh, yeah. On a basic level, how does this teaching overlap with the Christian concept of turning the other cheek? I get the sense that they're very different. Well, I don't know if they're different or not. I haven't really studied that.

[40:55]

I mean, I know the popular conception about it, which I don't... I think is a little bit... In my own self, I don't like that conception. Well, it's passively accepting. Yeah, but then you have to, again, where is that coming from? If it's coming from pure love for that person, that you are showing that you're going to extend that love to the person by turning the other cheek, that might be a little bit different than our popular conception of it. Maybe it's martyrdom versus self-awareness. I don't know. On martyrdom, I'm not quite... You don't know about martyrdom? I know about martyrdom, but I don't know where that... I don't know if I want to go into it. Turning the other cheek? I guess I'm not thinking of it as martyrdom in this case. I'm thinking of it as possibly an act of love. Maybe not. In the back.

[41:57]

I had a reaction as you were talking and I think I figured out what it is. I think what's correct for me is not to hear some of what you said as sort of an egregio mandate, like you should do this, you should do the right thing, of course you should, but I think sometimes there's a real fine line between that way of thinking of all the things we should be doing, which of course is correct on some level, versus I think what you really were talking about, which is acting from that sense of wisdom. Yes, right. But it's hard, I think, to... I agree. I have a hard time with the word should, and in this context I'm just kind of glossing over it. But it's an area where we can talk about how to present a good idea, or to offer a possibility for somebody.

[43:00]

Maybe a well-tested proposition. But that way of speaking shows up all over the place. If you read Suzuki Roshi's talks, it shows up there, that kind of expression. And so sometimes if you go back, you can retranslate if you want, but it is an issue that I'm aware of. I chose not to go into it this time. Yes, Nina? About righteous anger, this is a tall order, but one could be angry righteously at the action without being angry at the person who is, in a sense, also a victim of their action. Yeah, I think that's wonderful to understand that what that person was doing was, in some sense, they had good reasons

[44:04]

to do it. Perfectly good reasons to do it. And yet the effect of that action could be horrible. You know, really horrible. So I think it's good to bear that in mind. Understandable reasons, rather than good reasons. Well, good reasons. Knowing what they know now, they may choose never to do that again. But at the time, based on what they knew, they made the best choice they could. And so did we, and all of us do that. But that gets into a whole other level of things which we don't need to go on, and I think we've run out of time anyway, but thank you for bringing it up. Thank you.

[44:55]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ