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. 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; 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; principle 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.
(Translation by Soto-Shu Liturgy Conference, Green Gulch Farm, 1997, with minor revisions.)
The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from west to east.
I am very grateful for this opportunity to talk about the Sandokai, one of our most important teachings. Its mode of expression is so smooth that you may not feel its deep meaning when you read it. The author of this poem, Sekito Kisen (or Sekito Musai Daishin, his posthumous name), is the dharma grandson of the Sixth Chinese Ancestor, Daikan Eno (in Chinese, Dajian Huineng), and the direct descendent of Seigen Gyoshi (Ch. Qingyuan Xingsi), who is considered the Seventh Ancestor. Among the Sixth Ancestor's many disciples, the most prominent were Seigen Gyoshi and Nangaku Ejo. Later, Master Tozan Ryokai continued Seigen's lineage as the Soto school, and Master Rinzai Gigen (Ch. Linji Yixuan) continued Nangaku's lineage as the Rinzai school. Soto and Rinzai eventually became the dominant schools of Zen.
The way of Seigen and Sekito has a more gentle quality than Nangaku's way. In Japan we call this the elder brother's way. Nangaku is more like the second or third son, who is often rather naughty. The elder brother may not be so able or so bright, but he is very gentle. This is our understanding when we talk about Soto and Rinzai. Sometimes Soto Zen is called memmitsu no kafu—"a very careful and considerate style." Seigen's way is to find everything within himself. It is to realize the great mind that includes everything and to practice accordingly.
Our effort in Zen is to observe everything as-it-is. Yet even though we say so, we are not necessarily observing everything as-it-is. We say, "Here is my friend, over there is the mountain, and way up there is the moon." But your friend is not only your friend, the mountain is not only the mountain, and the moon is not only the moon. If we think, "I am here and the mountain is over there," that is a dualistic way of observing things. To go to San Francisco, we have to cross over the Tassajara mountains. That is our usual understanding. But that is not the Buddhist way of observing things. We find the mountain or the moon or our friend or San Francisco within ourselves. Right here. That is big mind within which everything exists.
Now, let's look at the title, Sandokai. San literally means "three," but here it means "things." Do is sameness. To identify one thing with another is do. It also refers to "oneness" or "one's whole being," which here means "great mind" or "big mind." So our understanding is that there is one whole being that includes everything, and that the many things are found in one whole being. Although we say "many beings," they are actually the many parts of one whole being that includes everything. If you say "many" it is many, and if you say "one" it is one. "Many" and "one" are different ways of describing one whole being. To completely understand the relationship between one great whole being and the many facets of that one great whole being is kai. Kai means to shake hands. You have a feeling of friendship. You feel that the two of you are one. In the same way, this one great whole being and the many things are good friends, or more than good friends because they are originally one. Therefore like shaking hands we say kai. "Hi, how are you?" This is the meaning of the poem's title. What is many? What is one? And what is the oneness of one and many?
Originally, Sandokai was the title of a Daoist book. Sekito used the same title for his poem, which describes Buddha's teaching. What is the difference between Daoist teachings and Buddhist teachings? There are many similarities. When a Buddhist reads it, it is a Buddhist text, and when a Daoist reads it, it is a Daoist text. Yet it is actually the same thing. When a Buddhist eats a vegetable it is Buddhist food, and when a vegetarian eats it, it is vegetarian food. Still it is just food.
As Buddhists, we do not eat a particular vegetable just because it has some special nourishing quality, or choose it because it is yin or yang, acid or alkaline. Simply to eat food is our practice. We don't eat just to support ourselves. As we say in our meal chant, "To practice our way, we eat this food." This is how big mind is included in our practice. To think "this is just a vegetable" is not our understanding. We must treat things as part of ourselves, within our practice and within big mind. Small mind is the mind that is under the limitation of desires or some particular emotional covering or the discrimination of good and bad. So, for the most part, even though we think we are observing things-as-it-is, actually we are not. Why? Because of our discrimination, or our desires. The Buddhist way is to try hard to let go of this kind of emotional discrimination of good and bad, to let go of our prejudices, and to see things-as-it-is.
When I say to see things-as-it-is, what I mean is to practice hard with our desires—not to get rid of desires, but to take them into account. If you have a computer, you must enter all the data: this much desire, this much nourishment, this kind of color, this much weight. We must include our desires as one of the many factors in order to see things-as-it-is. We don't always reflect on our desires. Without stopping to reflect on our selfish judgment we say "He is good" or "He is bad." But someone who is bad to me is not necessarily always bad. To someone else, he may be a good person. Reflecting in this way we can see things-as-it-is. This is buddha mind.
The poem begins Chikudo daisen no shin, which means "the mind of the great sage of India." That is Buddha's big mind that includes everything. The mind we have when we practice zazen is the great mind: We don't try to see anything; we stop conceptual thinking; we stop emotional activity; we just sit. Whatever happens to us, we are not bothered. We just sit. It is like something happening in the great sky. Whatever kind of bird flies through it, the sky doesn't care. That is the mind transmitted from Buddha to us.
Many things happen as you sit. You may hear the sound of the stream. You may think of something, but your mind doesn't care. Your great mind is just there sitting. Even when you are not aware of seeing, hearing, or thinking, something is going on in big mind. We observe things. Without saying "good" or "bad," we just sit. We enjoy things but have no special attachment to them. We have full appreciation of them at this time, that's all. After zazen we say, "Oh, good morning!" In that way, one after another, things will happen to us and we can fully appreciate them. That is the mind transmitted from Buddha. And that is the way we practice zazen.
If you practice zazen in this way, you are less likely to have trouble when you are enjoying some event. Do you understand? You may have a special experience and think, "This is it. This is how it should be." If someone opposes you, you will be angry. "No, it should be like this, not like that. Zen Center should be like this." Maybe so. But it is not always so. If times change and we lose Tassajara and move to another mountain, the way we have here cannot be the same way we will have there. So, without sticking to some particular way, we open our minds to observe things-as-it-is and to accept things-as-it-is. Without this basis, when you say "this is the mountain," or "this is my friend," or "this is the moon," the mountain will not be the mountain, my friend will not be my friend, and the moon will not be the moon itself. That is the difference between sticking to something and Buddha's way.
Buddha's way is the study and teaching of human nature, including how foolish we are, what kinds of desires we have, our preferences and tendencies. Without sticking to something, I try to remember to use the expression "liable to." We are liable to, or we have a tendency to do something. This is my motto.
When I was preparing this lecture someone asked me, "What is self-respect, and how can we obtain it?" Self-respect is not something that you can feel you have. When you feel "I have self-respect," that is not self-respect anymore. When you are just you, without thinking or trying to say something special, just saying what is on your mind and how you feel, then there is naturally self-respect. When I am closely related to all of you and to everything, then I am a part of one big whole being. When I feel something, I'm almost a part of it, but not quite. When you do something without any feeling of having done something, then that is you, yourself. You're completely with everyone and you don't feel self-conscious. That is self-respect.
When you feel that you are somebody, you have to practice zazen harder. As you know, it is difficult to sit without thinking or feeling. When you don't think or feel, you usually fall asleep. But without sleeping and without thinking, just to be yourself is our practice. When you can do that, you will be able to speak without thinking too much, and without having any special purpose. When you speak or act it will be just to express yourself. That is complete self-respect. To practice zazen is to attain this kind of self-respect. You must be strict with yourself and especially with your tendencies. We each have our own unique personal tendencies. But if you try to get rid of them, or if you try not to think or not to hear the sound of the stream during zazen, it is not possible. Let your ears hear without trying to hear. Let the mind think without trying to think and without trying to stop it. That is practice.
More and more, you will have this rhythm or strength as the power of practice. If you practice hard you will be like a child. While we were talking about self-respect a bird was singing outside. Peep-peep-peep. That's self-respect. Peep-peeppeep. It doesn't mean anything. Maybe he was just singing. Maybe without trying to think he was just singing, peep-peeppeep. When we heard it we couldn't stop smiling. We cannot say that it is just a bird. It controls the whole mountain, the whole world. That is self-respect.
In order to have this everyday practice, we study hard. When we reach this place, there is no need to say "one whole being" or "bird" or "many things which include one whole being." It could be just a bird or a mountain or the Sandokai. If you understand this, there will be no need to recite the Sandokai. Although we recite it in this Japanese-Chinese form, it is not a matter of Japanese or Chinese. It is just a poem, or a bird, and this is just my talk. It does not mean much. We say that Zen is not something to talk about. It is what you experience in a true sense. It is difficult. But anyway this is a difficult world, so don't worry. Wherever you go you have problems. You should confront your problems. It may be much better to have these problems of practice rather than some other mixed-up kinds of problems.
Student: The other day when I was beating the mokugyo, a small spider crawled across the top of it. There was nothing I could do to avoid the spider. I veered a little off to the side to avoid him, but he went right into the striker. It was too powerful for him to escape.
Suzuki Roshi: You didn't kill him.
Student: Something did! [Laughter.]
Suzuki Roshi: By mistake. It happened in that way.
Student: Yeah, but I couldn't stop.
Suzuki Roshi: Yeah. You know, it can't be helped. Buddha killed him! [Laughter.] He may be very happy.
To live in this world is not so easy. When you see children playing by a stream or on a bridge, you may be really worried. "The cars are going zoom, zoom, zoom on the highway nearby. What if there is an accident?" If something happens, that's all. If you stop and think, you will be terrified. Did you hear about the 165-year-old man who has more than two hundred children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren? If he thought about each one of them, he would be scared of losing one.
Our practice can be a very strict practice. You should be ready to kill something even if you are a Buddhist. Whether it is good or bad, you should do that sometime. It is impossible to survive without killing anything. We cannot live depending just on our feelings. Our practice must be deeper than that. That is the strict side of our practice. On the other hand, if it is absolutely necessary, you should stop hitting the mokugyo even though it throws everything into confusion. Not so easy.
Student: Would you explain more what you mean by "strict practice"?
Suzuki Roshi: Strict practice? Things are already going in a very strict way. There is no exception. Wherever there is something, there is some rule or truth behind it that is always strictly controlling it, without any exception. We think we care for freedom, but the other side of freedom is strict rule. Within the strict rule there is complete freedom. Freedom and strict rule are not two separate things. Originally we are supported by strict rules or truths. That is the other side of absolute freedom.
Student: Could you give us more examples that apply to our individual lives?
Suzuki Roshi: When you get up you should just get up. When everyone sleeps you should sleep. That is my example.
Student: My responsibility is such that it's very easy for me to follow the strict way, because it goes with my position. Other people have somewhat different responsibilities. Sometimes, because my inclination is to follow strictly, we have some differences, and sometimes I think it's okay for them to do things differently than I do. Is that right?
Suzuki Roshi: Yeah. Sometimes you should shut your eyes.
[Laughing.] Sometimes it may be unfortunate to see something. If you see it, you have to say something, so it may help you to practice without looking around. That is the best way, actually. If you look around, then, if you see the people on this side of the zendo, the people on the other side will sleep. So it's better not to see anything! [Laughter.] They won't know what you are doing. "He may not be sleeping, so all of us will stay awake." If you see something, that's all. The rest will be ignored. If you don't see anything, you cannot ignore anything. That is the big mind that includes everything. If someone moves, you will notice. Even though you don't try to hear it, if some sound comes you will catch it. If you focus on one person, the rest of the people will be very happy! [Laughter.] If you don't catch anyone, no one can move.
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.
In my first talk I explained the meaning of the title, Sandokai, and the first line, "The mind of the great sage of India." I would like to tell you about the background of this poem and why the Eighth Ancestor in China, Sekito Musai Daishin, wrote it.
When Daiman Konin, the Fifth Ancestor, announced that he was going to give dharma transmission to someone, all the monks thought that, among them, of course Jinshu would be the one to receive the transmission. Jinshu was a great scholar, and he later went to northern China and became a great teacher. But actually Eno, who was pounding rice in the corner of the temple, received the transmission and became the Sixth Ancestor. Jinshu's school was called Hoku Zen, or Northern Zen, and Eno's school spread to the south and was called Nan Zen, or Southern Zen. Later, after Jinshu's death, Northern Zen became weaker while Southern Zen became stronger. But in Sekito's time Northern Zen was still powerful.
The Sixth Ancestor, Eno, had many disciples. We can count fifty, but there must have been more. The youngest was Kataku Jinne (Ch. Heze Shenhui), a very alert and active person who denounced Jinshu's Zen pretty strongly. We cannot completely accept his teaching. If you have studied the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Ancestor, you know that Jinshu's teaching is harshly denounced there. The sutra may have been compiled by someone under the influence of Kataku Jinne. Anyway, there was some conflict between Eno's Southern Zen and Jinshu's Northern Zen. Sekito wanted to clarify this dispute from his own viewpoint. This is why he wrote the Sandokai.
The poem begins, "The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from west to east." Sekito's understanding is that the true teaching of the great sage, Shakyamuni Buddha, includes both the Southern school and the Northern school without any contradiction. Although the teaching of the great sage may not be completely understood, still it reaches everywhere. If you have the eyes to see or the mind to understand the teaching, you will see that it is not necessary to be involved in such a dispute. Because some of the descendants of Eno and Jinshu didn't completely understand the teaching of Buddha they got into a dispute. From Sekito's point of view there is no need for contention.
"Is intimately transmitted." Mitsuni literally means "exactly, without a gap between the two." The main purpose of the Sandokai is to explain reality from two sides. As I said, san means "many"; do means "one." What is many? What is one? Many are one; one is many. Even though you say "many," the many things do not exist separately from each other. They are closely related. If so, they are one. But even though they are one, the one appears to be many. So "many" is right, and "one" is right. Even though we say "one," we cannot ignore the various beings like stars and moons, animals and fish. From this point of view we say that they are interdependent. When we discuss the meaning of each being, we may have "many" things to discuss. When we conclude that reality is in fact just oneness, the whole discussion will take place in this understanding of the unity of one and many.
Another way to explain reality is by differentiation. Differentiation is equality, and things have equal value because they are different. If men and women are the same, then the distinctions between men and women have no value. Because men and women are different, men are valuable as men and women are valuable as women. To be different is to have value. In this sense all things have equal, absolute value. Each thing has absolute value and thus is equal to everything else. We are normally involved with standards of evaluation: exchange value, material value, spiritual value, and moral value. Because you have some standard you can say "he is good" or "he is not so good." The moral standard defines the value of people. But the moral standard is always changing; a virtuous person is not always virtuous. If you compare him with someone like Buddha, he is not so good. Good or bad is arrived at by some standard of evaluation. But because each thing is different, each thing has its own value. That value is absolute. The mountain is not more valuable because it is high; the river is not less valuable because it is low. On the other hand, because a mountain is high, it is a mountain, and it has absolute value; because water runs low in the valley, water is water and it has absolute value. The quality of the mountain and the quality of the river are completely different; because they are different they have equal value; and equal value means absolute value.
According to Buddhism equality is differentiation, and differentiation is equality. The usual understanding is that differentiation is the opposite of equality, but our understanding is that they are the same thing. One and many are the same. If you only see from the perspective that says one is different from many, your understanding is too materialistic and superficial.
The next line is "While human faculties are sharp or dull." It is difficult to translate this passage. It refers to the dispute between the Northern school and the Southern school. The clever ones do not always have an advantage in studying or accepting Buddhism, and it is not always the dull person who has difficulty. A dull person is good because he is dull; a sharp person is good because he is sharp. Even though you compare, you cannot say which is best.
I am not so sharp, so I understand this pretty well. My master [Gyokujun So-on] always addressed me as "You crooked cucumber!" I was his last disciple, but I became the first one because all the good cucumbers ran away. Maybe they were too smart. Anyway, I was not smart enough to run away so I was caught. For studying Buddhism my dullness was an advantage. When all the others went away and I was left alone with my master, I was very sad. If I had been a smart fellow I would have run away too. But I had left home by my own choice. My parents said, "You are too young. You should stay here." But I had to go. After leaving my parents, I felt I couldn't go back home. I could have, but I thought I couldn't. So I had nowhere to go. That is one reason why I didn't run away. Another reason was that I wasn't smart enough. A smart person does not always have the advantage, and a dull person is good because he is dull. This is our understanding.
Actually there is no dull person or smart person. Either way it is not so easy. There is some difficulty for both the smart person and the dull person. For instance, because he is not so smart, the dull person must study hard and read one book over and over again. A smart person forgets quite easily. He may learn quickly, but what he learns may not stay so long. For the dull person, it takes time to remember something, but if he reads it over and over and remembers it, it will not go away so soon. Smart or dull may not make so much difference.
"While human faculties are sharp or dull"—Ninkon ni ridon ari. In the Sandokai this point is not so important, but it is interesting to understand what human potentiality is in Buddhism in order to explain further our understanding of practice and why it is necessary to practice zazen. Nin is "human," kon is "root" or "potentiality"; so ninkon is "human potentiality." Ri here means "someone who has an advantage," and don means "someone who has a disadvantage." So the root of human potentiality is our advantage as well as disadvantage.
The capacity of the human mind has three aspects: potentiality, interrelationship, and appropriateness. We have the potentiality to be a buddha. It is like a bow and arrow. Because a bow and arrow have potentiality, if you use them the arrow will fly. If you don't use them the arrow won't fly. You are ready to be a buddha, but if you don't practice zazen, or Buddha doesn't help you, you cannot be a buddha even though you have potentiality.
Potentiality has two meanings. One is "possibility." From the viewpoint of our nature, we have the possibility to be buddhas. On the other hand, if you observe me in terms of time, even though I have the potentiality, if someone doesn't help me I cannot be a buddha. From the viewpoint of time, potentiality means something like "future possibility." This is the other meaning.
When we understand potentiality in terms of nature, we should be very kind and generous to everyone because everyone naturally has the possibility to be a buddha. But when we think in terms of "when," we should be very strict. Do you understand? If you miss this time, if you do not make a good effort this week or this year, if you always say "tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow," you will miss a chance to attain enlightenment, even though you have the possibility.
It is the same with your practice. When you don't think about time, you can be very generous with everyone, you can treat people very well. But if you think about time, about today and tomorrow, you cannot be so generous because you will lose time. So we say, "You do this and I will do that," and "You help this person and I will help that person." In this way we should be very strict with ourselves. That is why we analyze ki, potentiality, as both "possibility" and "future possibility." When you understand potentiality in this way, you can work and practice very well, sometimes in a very generous way and sometimes in a very strict way. We have to have two sides to our practice, or to our understanding of ki. This is the first meaning of ki—potentiality.
Ki also means "interrelationship"—here, the interrelationship between a buddha and someone with a good nature, and between a buddha and someone with a bad nature. I am sorry to say "bad nature," but tentatively I must use those words. We should encourage people who have a good nature, giving them some joy of practice. And when we practice with someone who apparently is not so good, we should suffer with that person. That is our understanding. So ki sometimes means the "interrelationship between someone who helps and someone who is helped." This is also called jihi. Ji here means to encourage someone. Hi means to give happiness. Jihi is usually translated "love." Love has two sides. One is to give joy, yoraku, and the other is to lessen suffering, bakku. To lessen someone's suffering we suffer with them, we share their suffering. That is love.
So if someone is very good, we can share the joy of practice with them by giving them a good cushion, a good zendo, or something like that. But a zendo doesn't mean anything to someone who is suffering too much; whatever you give may not be accepted. Someone may say, "I don't need it. I'm suffering too much. I don't know why. Right now to get out of the suffering is the most important thing for me. You can't help me, nothing can help me." When you hear this, you should be like Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva—you should become like the one who is suffering, and you should suffer as that person suffers. Because of your innate love, your instinctive love, you share the suffering. That is love in its true sense. So ki may mean not only "potentiality" or "possibility," but also "interrelationship."
The third meaning of ki is "good means" or "appropriate use," like finding the right cover for a pot. The traditional Japanese bath is a wooden tub, and after finishing our bath we cover it with a big wooden lid. That cover cannot be used for a pot. It is too big. So the pot must have its own cover. In this sense ki means "appropriate use." If you see people who are suffering because of ignorance, because they don't know what they are doing, you weep, you suffer with them. When you see people who enjoy their true nature, you should share their joy and give them encouragement. This is to have a good, appropriate relationship.
Next the poem says, "The way has no Northern or Southern Ancestors." That is very true. Jinshu's teaching is good, and the Sixth Ancestor Eno's teaching is good. Jinshu's way is good for someone who studies things slowly and deliberately, and the Sixth Ancestor's way is good for a quick, sharpminded person. One teacher may explain Buddha's teaching in detail so that the student can understand it word for word. But for another student it is not necessary to make the point using so many words. It depends on the person. A great teacher's way of explaining the teaching will be unique. But there is no difference in true understanding.
People become confused because of the way they evaluate things, discriminating between the dull and the keen; but from the standpoint of the Ancestors they are the same. All the Ancestors understood this point. So there is no Northern Ancestor or Southern Ancestor. That is Sekito's understanding.
By the way, Sekito was actually the Sixth Ancestor's disciple, but after the Sixth Ancestor passed away, Sekito became the disciple of Seigen, the Seventh Ancestor. That kind of thing happens very often. I have some disciples here, but if I die, those who couldn't complete their training as my disciples will be disciples of my disciples. Studying Buddhism is not like studying other things. It may take time before you can accept the teaching completely. The most important factor is you yourself, rather than your teacher. When you study hard, what you receive from your teacher is the spirit of study. That spirit will be transmitted from warm hand to warm hand. You should do it! That's all. There is nothing to transmit to you. And what you learn may be from books or from other teachers, so that is why we have other teachers as well as a master. Some of you are my disciples. We call a master's disciples deshi. Those of you who are not my disciples are called zuishin. A zuishin is a follower. One may stay quite a long time under some teacher, sometimes longer than the period one stays with one's master. When I was thirty-two my master passed away, so after that I studied under Kishizawa Roshi, and most of the understanding I have is from Kishizawa Roshi. But my master was Gyokujun So-on. Anyway, the true way has no Ancestor of North of South. The true way is one.
To practice is not to collect things and put them in your basket, but rather to find something in your sleeve. It's just that before you study hard, you don't know what you have in your sleeve. "Buddha and I have the same thing. Oh! That's amazing!" That is the spirit we must have. No matter what I say you should study hard. If you don't like what I say, you shouldn't accept it. That is okay. Eventually you may accept it. If you say, "No!" I will say, "Okay, but go ahead and try hard!" I think that is the characteristic of Buddhism. Our approach is very wide, and as a Buddhist you have enormous freedom in your study. Whatever you say is okay. So there is no Ancestor of South or North.
Student: Roshi, couldn't we just work from the Japanese and forget the English translation?
Suzuki Roshi: Yes. I am trying hard to follow the order of the characters. If you translate the poem into fluent English, I may find it difficult to explain. The original poem is full of technical terms, and you cannot change that. If you try to change it, you will lose something and it will not make much sense. Because I want you to understand completely I want to follow the original text faithfully, even though it is difficult.
The spiritual source shines clear in the light; the branching streams flow on in the dark. Grasping at things is surely delusion; according with sameness is still not enlightenment.
"The spiritual source shines clear in the light." The source is something wonderful, something beyond description, beyond our words. What Buddha talked about is the source of the teaching, beyond discrimination of right and wrong. This is important. Whatever your mind can conceive is not the source itself. The source is something that only a buddha knows. Only when you practice zazen do you have it. Yet whether you practice or not, whether you realize it or not, something exists, even before our realization of it, that is the source. It is not something you can taste. The true source is neither tasty nor tasteless.
In the last of these four lines Sekito says, "According with sameness is still not enlightenment." So to recognize the truth is not enlightenment either. Often we feel that the truth is something we should be able to see or figure out. But in Buddhism that is not the truth. The truth is something beyond our ability to describe, beyond our thinking. Truth can also mean "the wonderful source," wonderful beyond our description. This is the source of all being.
By the way, when we say "being," "being" includes our thoughts as well as the many things we see. Usually when we say "truth," we mean some underlying principle. That the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, or that the earth turns in a certain direction is truth. But in Buddhism that is not ultimate truth; it is also "being," being that is included in big mind. Whatever is in our mind—big or small, right or wrong—that is being. If you think about something in terms of right or wrong you may say, "This is eternal truth." But for us that idea of eternal truth is also on the side of being, because it exists simply in our mind.
We do not make much distinction between things that exist outside and things that exist within ourselves. You may say something exists outside of yourself, you may feel that it does, but it isn't true. When you say, "There is the river," the river is already in your mind. A hasty person may say, "The river is over there," but if you think more about it you will find that the river is in your mind as a kind of thought. That things exist outside of ourselves is a dualistic, primitive, shallow understanding of things.
So the characters of the first line, Reigen myoni kokettari, refer to ri, the source of the teaching beyond words. The true source, ri, is beyond our thinking; it is pure and stainless. When you describe it, you put a limitation on it. That is, you stain the truth or put a mark on it. In the Heart Sutra it says, "no color, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no objects of mind," and so forth. That is ri.
The next line reads Shiha anni ruchusu—"the branching streams flow on in the dark." Shiha means "branch stream." Sekito says shiha for poetic reasons: to make these two lines of the poem beautiful and to contrast shiha with reigen, "source." Reigen is more noumenal, and shiha is more phenomenal. To say "noumenal" or "phenomenal" is not exactly right, but tentatively I have to say so. That is why it is good to remember the more technical terms ri and ji here. Ji, which is used in the third line here, refers to the phenomenal—to something you can see, hear, smell, or taste as well as to objects of thought or ideas. Whatever can be introduced into our consciousness is ji. Something that is beyond our consciousness—the noumenal—is ri.
In the darkness the branching streams flow everywhere, like water. Even when you are not aware of water, there is water. Water is inside our physical body and in plants too; there is water all over. In the same way the pure source is everywhere. Each being is itself pure source, and pure source is nothing but each being. They are not two things. There is no difference between ri and ji, pure source and stream. The stream is pure source, and pure source is the stream. The pure source is flowing all over, even though you don't know it. This "don't know" is what we call "dark," and it is very important.
"Grasping at things is surely delusion." "Grasping at things" means to stick to the many things you see. Understanding that each being is different, you see each one as something special, and usually you will then stick to something. Yet even if you recognize the truth that everything is one, that is not always enlightenment. It may be enlightenment, but not always. It is just intellectual understanding. An enlightened person does not ignore things and does not stick to things, not even to the truth. There is no truth that is different from what each being is. Each being is itself the truth. You may think that there is some truth that is controlling each being. This truth, you may think, is like the truth of gravitation. If the apple is each being, then behind the apple is some truth working on the apple, like gravitation. To understand things in that way is not enlightenment. To stick to beings, ideas, even Buddha's teaching, saying, "Buddha's teaching is something like this," is to stick to ji. This is the backbone of the Sandokai.
"According with sameness is still not enlightenment." To recognize the truth is not enlightenment either. It may be better not to say anything. If I translate ri into English, it is already ji. Enlightenment is not something you can experience, actually. It is beyond our experience. If someone says, "I have attained enlightenment," that is wrong. It means that person sticks to some explanation of enlightenment. That is delusion. At the same time, if you think that enlightenment is beyond our experience, something that you cannot experience, even so, enlightenment is there. So you cannot say that there is no enlightenment or that there is enlightenment. Enlightenment is not something about which you can say there is or there is not. And at the same time, something that you can experience is enlightenment too.
In the last talk I referred to the big dispute in Sekito's time about sudden enlightenment and gradual enlightenment. The Sutra of the Sixth Ancestor denounces Jinshu's way as a way of gradual attainment, while declaring that the Sixth Ancestor's way is sudden enlightenment. According to the Sutra of the Sixth Ancestor, it seems that just to sit is not true practice.
But maybe that was not the Sixth Ancestor's own idea. There is actually not much difference between Jinshu's way and the Sixth Ancestor's way. The Sutra of the Sixth Ancestor was compiled right after the Sixth Ancestor's death, and maybe fifty years later the criticism of Jinshu's school of gradual attainment was added by Kataku Jinne—a disciple of the Sixth Ancestor—or by a disciple of Kataku Jinne after he had passed away. Kataku Jinne was a great Zen master. He was very active, and he was critical of Jinshu's practice, but probably not as harshly as the words in the sutra convey.
Kataku Jinne or his disciple may also have added this poem: "There is no bodhi tree; there is no mirror. There is no stand for the mirror; there is nothing. How is it possible to wipe the mirror?" Because this is not such a good poem, many people criticize it and think that it cannot be the Sixth Ancestor's poem.
In those days it was an honor to own a copy of the Sutra of the Sixth Ancestor. There are many versions of it, and the oldest ones do not include this poem or any criticism of the Jinshu school.
So one aim of the Sandokai is to clarify this wrong understanding concerning Jinshu, who is made to look as if he sticks to rituals or scholarly work. Scholarly study belongs to ji. Ri is something you can experience through practice. You may think that scholarly work is ri, but for us it is not so. To realize or have complete understanding of ri, to accept ri, is our practice. But even though you practice zazen and think that is ri, or the attainment or realization of ri, that is not always so, according to Sekito. If you understand this much you already understand the whole Sandokai.
The first lines of the poem are the introduction: "The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from west to east." Here "great sage" can also mean hermit. In Sekito's time, there were many Daoist hermits who were proud of their supernatural powers and who were seeking some elixir to prolong life. They were not much interested in Buddhist practice, and they couldn't understand why practicing zazen was so necessary. This was also a question for Dogen Zenji. * If all of us have buddha nature, why is it necessary to practice? Dogen suffered over this point. He couldn't resolve this problem through intellectual study.
When you really know yourself, you will realize how important it is to practice zazen. Before you know what you are doing, you don't know why we practice. You think you are quite free, that whatever you do is your choice, but actually you are creating karma for yourself and others. You don't know what you're doing, so you don't think there is any need to practice zazen. But we have to pay our own debts; no one else can pay our debts. That is why it is necessary to practice. To fulfill our responsibility we practice. We have to. If you don't practice, you don't feel so good, and you also create some problems for others. But not knowing this you will say, "Why is it necessary to practice Zen?" Moreover, when you say, "We have buddha nature," you may think buddha nature is something like a diamond in your sleeve. But true buddha nature is not like this. A diamond is ji, not ri. We are always involved with the world of ji without realizing ri.
There is something else I am very much interested in. Traditionally, as you may know, Buddhists say that Buddhism will not last forever. The sutras give various lengths of time, but usually they say it will perish 1500 years after Buddha's death.
According to tradition, in the first five hundred years, in the time of Buddha's direct disciples or grand-disciples, there would be great sages like Buddha. This is shobo, the time of Buddha. In the next five hundred years there would be people who practice zazen and study Buddhism. This is zobo, the time of dharma imitation. In mappo, the last period, beginning one thousand years after Buddha's death, people would not observe the precepts; they would read and chant sutras, but they would not be interested in zazen; people who practice zazen and understand the teaching would be difficult to find. This is true, actually. People today do not observe the precepts.
And in mappo, people would be involved in the ideas of emptiness and being, but they would not understand what is really meant by them. We talk about emptiness, and you may think you understand it; but even though you can explain it pretty well, it is ji not ri. Real emptiness will be experienced— not experienced, but realized—by good practice. So the purpose of the Sandokai is to make clear what emptiness is, what being is, what darkness is, what clarity is, what the true source of the teaching is, and who the various beings are who are supported by the true source of the teaching.
I borrowed a book from Gary Snyder's wife, Masa, about Sangaikyo, a small Tantric school in Japan. In that book it says that people 1000 years after the Buddha's death may be classified in two ways: innocent and shameless. This book explains what people are doing both here and in Japan. In a strict sense, neither the Japanese nor the Americans observe the precepts. In both countries we eat fish and kill animals. But in America you are very innocent. You don't know what you are actually doing when you violate the precepts. In Japan we are shameless because we know what we are doing and we still violate the precepts. Innocent people appear shameless, but it is not real shamelessness.
So you may ask, "What is the real teaching of Buddha?" If you don't understand it you will keep asking, "What is it? What is it? What does it mean?" You are just seeking for something that you can understand. That is a mistake. We don't exist in that way. Dogen Zenji says, "There is no bird who flies knowing the limit of the sky. There is no fish who swims knowing the end of the ocean." We exist in the limitless universe. Sentient beings are numberless and our desires are limitless, but we still have to continue making our effort just as a fish swims and a bird flies. So Dogen Zenji says, "A bird flies like a bird; a fish swims like a fish." That is the bodhisattva's way, and that is how we observe our practice.
When we understand things in this way, according to Dogen, we are not people in mappo, the last period; our practice is not disturbed by any framework of time or space. Dogen said, "Buddha is always here." In some way, still, Buddhism exists, and when we really understand what Buddha meant, we are in Buddha's time.
All the objects of the senses interact and yet do not. Interacting brings involvement. Otherwise, each keeps its place.
In the last talk I explained how people stick to ji, "things." That is usual. The characteristic of Buddha's teaching is to go beyond things—beyond various beings, ideas, and material things. When we say "truth," we usually mean something we can figure out. The truth that we can figure out or think about is ji. When we go beyond subjective and objective worlds, we come to the understanding of the oneness of everything, the oneness of subjectivity and objectivity, the oneness of inside and outside.
For instance, when you sit zazen you are not thinking about anything or watching anything. Your focus is four or five feet ahead of you, but you do not watch anything. Even though many ideas come, we do not think about them—they come in and go out, that's all. We do not entertain various ideas— we do not invite them to stay or serve them food or anything. If they come in, okay, and if they go out, okay. That's all. That is zazen. When we practice in this way, even though we do not try, our mind includes everything. We are not concerned about, nor do we expect, something that may exist beyond our reach.
Whatever we talk about at any moment is within our mind. Everything is within our mind. But usually we think there are many things: there is this, and this, and this out there. In the cosmos there are many stars, but right now we can only reach the moon. In a few years we may reach some other planets, and eventually we may reach some other solar system. In Buddhism, mind and being are one, not different. As there is no limit to cosmic being, there is no limit to our mind; our mind reaches everywhere. It already includes the stars, so our mind is not just our mind. It is something greater than the small mind that we think is our mind. This is our understanding.
Our mind and things are one. So if you think, "All this is mind," that is so. If you think, "Over there is some other being," that is also so. But more to the point, when Buddhists say "this" or "that" or "I," that "this" or "that" or "I" includes everything. Listen to the tone of it rather than just the words.
Sound is different from noise. Sound is something that comes from your practice. Noise is something more objective, something that can bother you. If you strike a drum, the sound you make is the sound of your own subjective practice, and it is also the sound that encourages all of us. Sound is both subjective and objective.
In Japan we say hibiki. Hibiki means "something that goes back and forth like an echo." If I say something, I will get feedback—back and forth. That is sound. Buddhists understand a sound as something created in our mind. I may think, "The bird is singing over there." But when I hear the bird, the bird is me already. Actually, I am not listening to the bird. The bird is here in my mind already, and I am singing with the bird. Peep-peep-peep. If you think while you are studying, "The blue jay is singing above my roof, but its voice is not so good," that thought is noise. When you are not disturbed by blue jays, blue jays will come right into your heart, and you will be a blue jay, and the blue jay will be reading something, and then the blue jay will not disturb your reading. When we think, "The blue jay over my roof should not be there," that thought is a more primitive understanding of being. Because of our lack of practice, we understand things in that way.
The more you practice zazen, the more you will be able to accept something as your own, whatever it is. That is the teaching of jiji muge from the Kegon (Ch. Huayen) school. Jiji means "being that has no barrier, no disturbance." Because things are interrelated, it is difficult to say, "This is a bird and this is me." It is difficult to separate the blue jay from me. That is jiji muge.
The text says, "All the objects of the senses interact and yet do not." Although things are interrelated, everyone—every being—can be the boss. Each one of us can be a boss because we are so closely related. If I say "Mel," Mel is already not just Mel. He is one of Zen Center's students, so to see Mel is to see Zen Center. If you see Mel you understand what Zen Center is. But if you think, "Oh, he is just Mel," then your understanding is not good enough. You don't know who Mel is. If you have a good understanding of things themselves, you will understand the whole world through things. Each one of us is the boss of the whole world. And when you have this understanding, you will realize that things are interrelated, yet they are also independent. Each one of us is completely and absolutely independent. There is nothing to compare. You are just you.
We have to understand things in two ways. One way is to understand things as interrelated. The other way is to understand ourselves as quite independent from everything. When we include everything as ourselves, we are completely independent because there is nothing with which to compare ourselves. If there is only one thing, how can you compare anything to it? Because there is nothing to compare yourself to, this is absolute independence—not interrelated, absolutely independent.
Now the text says, "All the objects of the senses." The senses—our eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and body—are gates, and sense objects enter the gates. They are interrelated and at the same time independent. For eyes there is something to see, for ears there is something to hear, for the nose something to smell, for the tongue something to taste, for the body something to touch. There are five kinds of sense objects for the five sense organs. This is Buddhist common sense. Referring to them here in the poem is just a way of saying "everything." It is the same as saying "flowers and trees, birds and stars, streams and mountains," but instead we say "each sense and its objects."
So the various beings that we see and hear are interrelated, but at the same time, each being is absolutely independent and has its own value. This value we call ri. Ri is that which makes something meaningful, not just theoretical. Even though you don't attain enlightenment, we say you already have enlightenment. That enlightenment we call ri. The fact that something exists here means there is some reason for it. I don't know the reason. No one knows. Everything must have its own value. It is very strange that no two things are the same. There is nothing to compare yourself to, so you have your own value. That value is not a comparative value or an exchange value; it is more than that. When you are just sitting zazen on the cushion you have your own value. Although that value is related to everything, that value is also absolute. Maybe it is better not to say too much.
"Interacting brings involvement." A bird comes from the south in spring and goes back in the fall, crossing various mountains, rivers, and oceans. In this way, things are interrelated endlessly, everywhere.
"Otherwise, each keeps its place." This means that even though the bird stays in some place, at some lake, for instance, his home is not only the lake but also the whole world. That is how a bird lives.
In Zen sometimes we say that each one of us is steep like a cliff. No one can scale us. We are completely independent. But when you hear me say so, you should understand the other side too—that we are endlessly interrelated. If you only understand one side of the truth, you can't hear what I'm saying. If you don't understand Zen words, you don't understand Zen, you are not yet a Zen student. Zen words are different from usual words. Like a double-edged sword, they cut both ways. You may think I am only cutting forward, but no, actually I am also cutting backward. Watch out for my stick. Do you understand? Sometimes I scold a disciple—"No!" The other students think, "Oh, he has been scolded," but it is not actually so. Because I cannot scold the one over there, I have to scold the one who is near me. But most people think, "Oh, that poor guy is being scolded." If you think like that you are not a Zen student. If someone is scolded you should listen; you should be alert enough to know who is being scolded. This is how we train.
When I was quite a young disciple, my dharma brothers and I went somewhere with our teacher and came back pretty late. There are many venomous snakes in Japan. My teacher said, "You are wearing tabi [white socks worn with sandals], and I am not. A snake may bite me, so you go ahead." We agreed and walked ahead of him. As soon as we reached the temple he said to us, "All of you sit down." We didn't know what had happened, but we all sat down in front of him. "What inconsiderate boys you are," he said. "When I am not wearing tabi, why do you wear tabi? I gave you a warning: 'I am not wearing tabi.' You should have understood and taken off your tabi too, but instead you kept them on and walked ahead of me. What silly boys you are."
We should be alert enough to hear the meaning behind the words. That's all. We should realize something more than what is said.
One night, when I was a student at Eiheiji monastery, I opened the right side of the sliding shoji door—because it is customary to open that side—but I was scolded. "Don't open that side!" one of the senior monks said. So the next morning I opened the left side, and I was scolded again: "Why do you open that side?" I didn't know what to do. When I opened the right side I was scolded, and when I opened the left side I was scolded again. I couldn't figure out why. But at last I noticed that the first time, a guest had been on the right side, and the second time, a guest had been on the left side. So both times I had opened a side so that a guest had been exposed. That was why I was scolded. At Eiheiji they never told us why, they just scolded us. Their words were double-edged.
The Sandokai's words are also double-edged. One side is interdependence (ego) and one side is absolute independence (fuego). This interdependency goes on and on everywhere, and yet things stay in their own places. That is the main point of the Sandokai.
Student: Does interdependence mean the bird is the whole world, and independence mean the bird is just a bird?
Suzuki Roshi: Yes. In the Heart Sutra we say form is emptiness, emptiness is form. "Form is emptiness"—ego. And "emptiness is form"—fuego. [Knocks on the table.] This is fuego. You cannot say anything, you know. It is difficult to say what it is. [Knocks on the table again.]
Student: Is there any particular reason why we strike the bell as we chant the first syllable of Mommon issai no kyo?
Suzuki Roshi: To hit the bell means to produce an independent buddha, one buddha after another. Gong. Buddha. One independent buddha appears. Gong. Another independent buddha appears. When the next buddha appears, the previous buddha disappears. So one by one, striking one after another, you produce a buddha, one after another. That is our practice.
Student: Roshi, today someone said, "No students, no teacher; no teacher, no students." Someone else asked, "Well, what makes the roshi the roshi?" And someone said, "Because he has students." You can't be the roshi without students. Students can't be students without the roshi. They are both independent because they are together.
Suzuki Roshi: Yes, together. Without students, no teacher. And the students encourage the teacher. It is very much so. If I have no students I may goof off every day. Because I have so many students watching me, I must do something; I must study so that I can give a lecture. If there is no lecture, I will not study.
But at the same time I shall be very much ashamed of myself if I study just to give the lecture. So usually, when I study for a lecture I go off in another direction, following something interesting, and most of the time I don't study for the lecture. But still, if I don't study I don't feel so good. Because I feel it is necessary to prepare for the lecture, I start to study. But as soon as I start, I go off on my own and study for the sake of studying, not just for giving the lecture. Things are going on in this way endlessly. And it is good, you know.
Someday, what I study will help students. I don't know when. Just to feel good we study, and just to feel better we practice zazen. No one knows what will happen to us after sitting one, two, or ten years. No one knows, and it is right that no one knows. Just to feel good we sit zazen, actually. Eventually that kind of purposeless practice will help you.
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.
Everything has its own nature and form, and when you hear a voice it is either agreeable or disagreeable. Here the Sandokai is talking about sights and sounds, but the same is true for of all the senses, as well as the mind. There are good and bad tastes, good and bad feelings, agreeable and disagreeable ideas. It is our attachment to them that creates suffering. When you hear something good you will enjoy it. When you hear something bad you will be annoyed or disturbed. But if you understand reality completely you will not be bothered by things. The next phrase gives the reason: "Refined and common speech come together in the dark"—An wa jochu no koto ni kanai.
We understand things in two ways: in darkness (an) and in the light of form (shiki), where we see things as good and bad. We know that there is no good or bad in things themselves. It is we who differentiate things as good or bad and thus create good or bad. If we know this we will not suffer so much. "Oh, that is what I am doing!"
Things in themselves have no good or bad nature. To understand this is to understand things in utter darkness. Then you are not involved in a dualistic understanding of things as good or bad. Sekito says, "Refined and common speech come together in the dark." Darkness includes good and bad. In utter darkness, good words and bad words will not disturb you.
"Clear and murky phrases are distinguished in the light." There are pure words and muddy words. In brightness we have dualistic words, the duality of pure and impure.
Even though we are angry at someone, we can still acknowledge that person. Because a teacher knows a student very well, sometimes the teacher will be angry with him. The teacher knows that the student is very good, but sometimes the student will be lazy. Then the teacher will hit him. Sometimes the teacher will praise or encourage him. But it does not mean we are using different methods or attitudes. The understanding is the same, but the expression is different. Students who are pessimistic, who see things very negatively, should be encouraged. But if they are too good or too bright, then the teacher will scold them. That is our way.
We say the "positive way" and the "negative way." The positive way is to acknowledge things in terms of good or bad, beautiful or ugly. If you make a good effort you will be a good student. To acknowledge a student's effort is the positive way. The negative way is not to accept anything. Whatever you say, you will get thirty blows. Positive and negative— sometimes one and sometimes the other. Usually we are very much attached to either the bright side or the dark side of things.
Do you know this famous koan? A monk asked a master, "It is so hot. How is it possible to escape from the heat?" And the master said, "Why don't you go to a place where it is neither cold nor hot?" The disciple said, "Is there a place where it is neither cold nor hot?" The master said, "When it is cold you should be cold buddha. When it is hot you should be hot buddha." You may think that if you practice zazen you will attain a stage where it is neither cold nor hot, where there is no pleasure or suffering. You may ask, "If we practice zazen is it possible to have that kind of attainment?" The true teacher will say, "When you suffer you should suffer. When you feel good you should feel good." Sometimes you should be a suffering buddha. Sometimes you should be a crying buddha. And sometimes you should be a very happy buddha.
This happiness is not exactly the same as the happiness that people usually have. There is a little difference, and that little difference is significant. Because buddhas know both sides of reality, they have this kind of composure. They are not disturbed by something bad, or ecstatic about something good. They have a true joy that will always be with them. The basic tone of life remains the same, and in it there are some happy melodies and some sad melodies. That is the feeling an enlightened person may have. It means that when it is hot, or when you are sad, you should be completely involved in being hot or being sad, without caring for happiness. When you are happy you should just enjoy the happiness. We can do this because we are ready for anything. Even though circumstances change suddenly, we don't mind. Today we may be very happy, and the next day we don't know what will happen to us. When we are ready for what will happen tomorrow, then we can enjoy today completely. You do this not by studying a lecture but through your practice.
These are Sekito's words. Later, in Tozan's time (three generations after Sekito) people got stuck in word games about brightness and darkness. They liked talking about the bright side, the dark side, and the middle way, but they lost the point of how to obtain real freedom.
Dogen Zenji, who lived still later, did not get caught up in these word games so much. Rather he emphasized how to get out of word games by fully appreciating things moment after moment. He was more interested in a koan like, "When it is cold you should be a cold buddha; when it is hot you should be a hot buddha." That's all. To be completely involved in what you are doing without thinking about various things is Dogen's way. This kind of attainment is reached through actual practice, not through words.
Words can help your understanding of things. When you are very dualistic, when you are getting confused, they can help you. But if you are too interested in talking about these things, you will lose your way. We should be interested in actual zazen, not in these words, and we should practice actual zazen.
Dogen Zenji's way is to find the meaning in each being— like a grain of rice or a cup of water. You may say a cup of water or a grain of rice is something that you see in brightness. But when you pay full respect to the grain of rice, I mean when you actually respect it as you respect Buddha himself, then you will understand that a grain of rice is absolute. When you live completely involved in the dualistic world, you have the absolute world in its true sense. When you practice zazen without seeking for enlightenment or seeking for anything, then there is true enlightenment.
Student: When something happens and I suffer because of it, part of me feels the pain and part of me is trying to understand the pain at the same time. I don't know whether I try to understand because I'm afraid of letting go and just feeling the pain, or whether that's wise understanding.
Suzuki Roshi: You have this difficulty because you are involved in a problem for yourself. As long as you are involved in personal problems, whatever understanding you may have is only on the bright side. You have no chance to realize the other side—darkness, the absolute. I am talking now as if I am an enlightened person, and you are listening to this as if you are an enlightened person. In other words, all of us are bodhisattvas, and as bodhisattvas we are discussing this kind of problem. But when you apply this kind of talk just to gain an intellectual understanding of your problem, you have no chance to understand the other side of it. That is why you have this problem. If you are really practicing the bodhisattva way, whatever side it may be is okay. When you criticize yourself, it is okay; when you do what you want to do, that is also okay. You are not doing two different things. Whatever you do is always good according to the situation, but you don't have confidence in your actions or in your life because you are involved in selfish or personal practice.
Student: When I am fully awake I have, maybe, a little control over my desires, but in the morning—
Suzuki Roshi: In the morning you have trouble. I know that. So that is why I say, "Get up!" [Knocks on the table.]
Student: How do you do that?
Suzuki Roshi: Just do it. Or else someone will come and hit you! [Makes a sort of humorous growl.]
Student: I did just get up a couple of times—I jumped out of bed. But it was such a big thing!
Suzuki Roshi: Yes. A big thing. So if you can get up pretty well, I think your practice is almost okay. That is a very good chance to practice our way. Just get up. Okay? That is the most important thing.
Student: Roshi, what does studying a book give you?
Suzuki Roshi: For you it may not be so important. But for me,I must have some clear picture of what I'm talking about, or else I cannot say anything. That is why I study before I lecture. My teacher always told me, "Even though it doesn't help, before you lecture you should study." [Laughter.]
The four elements return to their natures just as a child turns to its mother. Fire heats, wind moves, water wets, earth is solid.
According to Buddhist thought, the four elements are fire, wind, water, and earth. Though not a perfect description, we say that these four elements each have their own nature. The nature of fire is to purify. Wind brings things to maturity. I don't know why, but wind-nature encourages things to be more mature. Wind has a more organic activity, while the activity of fire is more chemical. The nature of water is to contain things. Wherever you go there is water; water contains everything. This is opposite to the usual way of thinking about water. Instead of saying there is water in the trunk of the tree, we say that water contains the trunk of the tree as well as the leaves and branches. So water is something vast in which everything, including ourselves, exists. Solidness is the nature of earth. "Earth" here does not mean land, but rather the solid nature of matter.
According to Buddhism, if you analyze a thing into the smallest unit imaginable, that smallest final unit is called gokumi. Although sometimes defined as "atom," it is not really the atom because the atom is not the final unit. I do not know the proper terms, but according to my understanding of modern physics the smallest, final unit of being has no weight or size. It is just electrical energy.
Strangely enough, Buddhism has a similar idea. Although gokumi has the four elements—fire, wind, water, and earth— it is not something solid. When we reach this point, we see that its nature is just emptiness. The four elements are not just material. They are energy or potential or readiness. This is gokumi. To these four elements we add the quality of emptiness. So fire, wind, water, and earth are all empty. Even though they are empty, from this emptiness these four elements come into being. And as soon as these four come into being, right there is the final unit, gokumi. That is a Buddhist understanding of being. It looks as if we are talking about matter, but these elements are not just matter. They are both spirit and matter. Thinking mind is included. Accordingly, emptiness includes both matter and spirit, both mind and object, both the subjective world and the objective world. Emptiness is the final being, which our thinking mind cannot reach.
Each of the four elements, then, resumes its own nature, that is, comes to emptiness. "Just as a child turns to its mother." Without the mother there is no child. That the child is here means the mother is here. That emptiness is here means that the four elements are here. And even though the four elements are here, they are nothing but a momentary formation of the final emptiness.
In these four lines, and in the six lines that follow, Sekito is explaining reality in two ways: one is independence and the other is dependence. He talks first about the truth of independence. Although there are four elements, these elements naturally resume their original natures. Although there are many things, each one of them is independent. A child, even though it has a mother, is independent. Fire is independent in its nature of heat, wind is independent in its nature of movement, water is independent in its nature of moisture, and earth is independent in its nature of solidity. Each thing is independent.
I want to read the lines for the next talk so that you can understand the lines for this talk better.
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.
These lines express the understanding of what I call "independency." Each one of you is independent, but you are related to each other. Even though you are related to each other, you are independent. You can say it both ways. Do you understand? Usually when we say "independent," we have no idea of "dependent." But that is not a Buddhist understanding of reality. We always try to understand things completely so we will not be mixed up. We should not be confused by "dependence" or "independence." If someone says, "Everything is independent," we say, "Okay, that is so." And if someone else says, "Things are interrelated," that is also true. We understand both sides. So whichever you say, that is okay. But if someone sticks to the idea of independence only, we will say to him, "No, you are wrong." There are many koans like this. For example: "If the final karmic fire burns everything up, at that time will the buddha nature exist?" Sometimes the teacher will answer, "Yes, it will exist." But at another time he will answer, "No, it will not exist." Both are true. Someone may ask him, "Then why did you say it will exist?" That person will get a big slap. "What are you thinking about? Don't you understand what I mean? That buddha nature will not exist is right, and that it will exist is also right."
From the viewpoint of independency, everything exists with buddha nature no matter what happens to this world. But even so, nothing exists when seen from the viewpoint of utter darkness or the absolute. That which exists is nothingness, or darkness, in which the many things exist as one. Many things exist, but there is nothing you can see or say about that. There is no way to understand things by explaining them individually. This is just an intellectual description. We must have an actual feeling of it as well.
If you can just appreciate each thing, one by one, then you will have pure gratitude. Even though you observe just one flower, that one flower includes everything. It is not just a flower. It is the absolute, it is Buddha himself. We see it in that way. But at the same time, that which exists is just a flower, and there is no one to see it and nothing to be seen. That is the feeling we should have in our practice and in our everyday activity. Then, whatever work you do, you will have a continuous feeling of pure gratitude.
When we think about something in terms of duality, we observe and understand it intellectually. Even so, it is important that we do not stick to our ideas. That understanding should be improved day by day by our pure non-dual thinking. We say, "You cannot catch a fish in the same place twice." Today, you were fortunate to catch a big fish at a certain place, but tomorrow you should fish in some other place. We also have the saying "Notch the rail of the boat in order to mark our location." The boat is moving, but you mark the rail to remember the place: "Oh, there was something beautiful, and we should remember it." Marking it doesn't help, because the boat is always moving. But we do it just the same.
This is a good example of the thinking mind. It shows our foolishness and suggests to us what Buddhist life is. Do you know the old Chinese story of the hunter who sees a rabbit run into a tree stump? He comes back the next day and waits for another rabbit to run into the stump. This is very foolish. If a rabbit comes, we are lucky. If he doesn't, we shouldn't complain. We should appreciate what we see here, right now. "Oh, a beautiful flower!" We should fully appreciate it. But we should not mark it on the rail of the boat.
Student: In a previous talk, you said that if we understand our closeness, our dependence on other things, then we are independent. Are we independent even if we don't understand this?
Suzuki Roshi: Actually, it is so, but the point is that you don't feel that way, so you don't understand it in that way. Yet even though you don't have a really close feeling toward others, if you know this fact even intellectually, you will not make too big a mistake. Or at least you will not stick to one side only, or you will not be so arrogant.
There is something very important here. When I talk this way, I am talking about things as if I am a completely enlightened person. For an enlightened person this is very true, but for people who are not enlightened it is just talk. When our practice follows this understanding, that is true Buddhism. Our practice should not be just intellectual. Even if you practice hard, without this kind of understanding your practice doesn't make much sense. It is still involved in the idea of somethingness.
Student: You said that for an enlightened person it's very true, and for a non-enlightened person it's just talk.
Suzuki Roshi: What's missing? Practice is missing. Only when you practice zazen hard is it true. At the same time, even though you practice hard, your practice will not always be complete. There may be a big gap between the truth and your understanding or actual experience. Your intellectual understanding may be high, but your practice may be low. To have an intellectual understanding is easy, but practicing with emotions is difficult because we easily stick to something emotionally. So we say, "It is easy to understand nothingness," and "It is easy to destroy an intellectual understanding." But to deal with emotional difficulty is as hard as splitting a lotus in two. Long strings will follow and you cannot get rid of them. The strings remain. With intellectual difficulty, it is as easy as breaking a stone in two. Nothing is left.
Student: When I see a situation in which one person seems to be hurting another, I become emotionally upset. Am I becoming upset because I'm not seeing the situation as it actually is? If I were seeing it as it actually is, would I not be upset?
Suzuki Roshi: That is a very difficult question to answer. It is difficult to know whether one person is helping another in an appropriate way or not. If it is not appropriate, you will be upset. At least you will worry. But even when someone is helping another properly you may be upset. That happens, you know. If someone is helping your girlfriend or boyfriend in an appropriate way, you may get upset anyway. That kind of thing happens pretty often.
Student: Roshi, my question is more like this: If a person really sees things clearly, is there then no situation that would upset him emotionally?
Suzuki Roshi: Upset emotionally? I don't think so. But affected, yes. There is a big difference between these two. A buddha may be upset quite easily, in the sense of being deeply affected. But when he is upset, it is not because of his attachments. Sometimes he will be very angry. Anger is allowed when it is buddha's anger. But that anger is not the same as the anger we usually have. If a buddha is not upset when he should be upset, that is also a violation of the precepts. When he needs to be angry, he must be angry. That is a characteristic of the Mahayana way of observing precepts. We say, "Sometimes anger is like a sunset." Even though it looks like anger, actually it is a beautiful red sunset. If anger comes from pure mind, from purity like a lotus, it is good.
Student: Roshi, I've observed that our emotions seem to be independent of our intellectual understanding and have a life of their own that has nothing to do with what we know or understand. What is the source of emotion in our body or mind? Where does it come from?
Suzuki Roshi: It mostly comes from a physical source. Maybe it is a physiological thing. The thinking mind is like a river. When we think, we think in a universal, river way, ignoring physical and physiological conditions.
If we focused on the various possible conditions—five, ten, twenty, one hundred, or more—it would not be possible to think. A characteristic of the thinking mind is to ignore all the conditions and follow its own track, so a person tends to just think and go on. Whatever happens, it doesn't matter. "What are you talking about? We should do this!" This may be more of a man's way. A woman's way may be to attend to the various conditions, carefully observing them and figuring out what to do bit by bit.
There is a similarity between the thinking mind and emotional practice. A practitioner doesn't become so involved with things either emotionally or intellectually, so it is easier to see things for what they are.
Student: I have some difficulty listening to these talks. When I used to chant the Sandokai knowing nothing about what it meant, I was able to concentrate on nothing but my breathing and my voice coming from my hara. But now I start thinking about what the Sandokai means and I lose touch with what I am doing. I get attached to the words and to the idea that there is the dark side, the ri, becoming the ji side. Now when I chant the Sandokai, the intellectual side, the bright side, is strong and I don't enjoy chanting it. Maybe you can give me some advice on how to avoid this kind of difficulty.
Suzuki Roshi: You cannot avoid it. That is why I am talking to you. You have to polish your understanding.
Student: You said the other day that in the morning we should just get up. Usually I just get up, but this morning when I woke up, I didn't get right up. I waited until the wake-up bell came back again, and then I started to think about what you said in the talks.
Suzuki Roshi: That was not just because of the talks. That was not my fault! [Laughing.]
Student: My question is: can we have subjective understanding of our practice without having some kind of objective or right understanding, or do we have to have both of them and balance them? Can we practice Buddha's way without knowing Buddha's way intellectually?
Suzuki Roshi: If you can, you are very lucky. But, unfortunately, we cannot practice without intellectual understanding.
Student: When we sit zazen and have correct posture and follow our breathing, do we need these concepts about Buddhism or about the four elements?
Suzuki Roshi: No, at that time we should forget them.
Student: I mean, do we have to understand the idea of Buddhism to practice?
Suzuki Roshi: We have to because we tend to look at things in that way. Back and forth—study and practice. We have to polish our understanding so that we will not be intellectually mixed up. That is important.
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 my last lecture 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.
Sekito 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 why Sekito Zenji 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 own approach to reality, and the Soto school 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.
Now I want to explain these lines, which describe reality from the viewpoint of independency. "Eye and sight, ear and sound, nose and smell, tongue and taste." It looks as if Sekito is talking dualistically 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. Only when you analyze it is there someone seeing something and something that is seen. 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 eye 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. I see. Or someone or 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.
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. 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 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 come to this understanding, we can keep our precepts completely.
But even so, we should not kill anything without a reason, or we should not kill by making up some convenient reason. "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.
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 did not kill" is the absolute viewpoint. Even though you violate your precepts, if after doing it you feel very sorry, if you say "I am sorry" to the earwig, it is Buddha's way. In this way our practice will go on and on. 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.
The Buddhist way is, in one word, jihi, compassion. Jihi means to encourage people when they are feeling positive and also to help them 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. This 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. 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 Sekito is talking about.
"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; because of the absolute buddha nature we exist. Understanding things in this way, we have oneness.
"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 the absolute being or source of the teaching. That is what Sekito is talking about here.
In the Bonmo-kyo, an important scripture on the precepts, it says, "To see is not to see, and not to see is to see." To eat meat is not to eat meat; not to eat meat is to eat meat. 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." To see a woman is not to see a woman. Not to see a woman is to see a woman.
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. One of them carried her on his back across the river. Later, the other monk became furious. "You are 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, 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, actually he was not helping her. Do you understand? So not to help her was to help her in the true sense.
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 Buddha's teaching. Without any idea of attainment, without any idea of doing anything, without any idea of meaningful practice, just to sit is our way. 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.
Student: I don't feel that talking about Buddhism or the Sandokai is the same as my life or my practice. I feel some separation. Talking about it seems like something else. It's way out there.
Suzuki Roshi: I felt that way myself for a pretty long time. It is rather difficult to communicate some feeling through my talk. That is why the old masters twisted their students' noses or hit them. "Right here! What are you thinking about?" In short, that is the point. I am going around and around the point, so I am using words. We speak of scratching an itchy foot with our shoe on. It doesn't help so much, but even so I have to talk.
Student: You said that when we kill an earwig or any insect, we can't kill it as long as everything is here. Do you mean that each thing will always be each thing, this lecture will always be this lecture?
Suzuki Roshi: When you see things-as-it-is, it is so.
Student: If the body of the earwig dies, what happens to the earwig's karma? Where does the earwig go?
Suzuki Roshi: Earwigs go to the source of reality. They know where to go. When we speak in this way you will feel that it is just talk. But when you suffer a lot it will be a great relief to know that.
Student: Roshi, what is the difference between you and me?
Suzuki Roshi: There is difference and no difference—that is why we practice together. Because there is some difference we practice together, and because we are not different we practice together. If you are completely different from me, there is no reason why you should practice with me; and if we are completely the same, there is no reason why we should practice together. Because we are different, we practice our way, and because we are originally the same, we practice our way. Not different and different. This kind of thing is not easy to know. Traditional practice starts from the source of the teaching, which is nothingness, which is absolute, which is non-duality. Usually you are attracted to something through your eyes or nose, through sight or smell or some form, but not through this original source of the teaching. The original source is not something that can be described, so we say "tongueless speech." We are talking about something that is impossible to talk about. That is called teisho, not "lecture." We can explain this with words, but we are explaining what is empty, so we call these words "the finger pointing at the moon." If you understand what the moon is, the finger is not necessary anymore. What you should understand is not my words. You should realize by your true experience what I mean. You are blind to this point, so you feel I am talking about something in a sophisticated way that looks like the so-called Buddhist way. The Buddhist way is not these words but the meaning behind the words.
Student: In killing the earwig there are no words or memories or anything. There is just the experience of killing the earwig. Is that the teacher that leads you to the source? Is the experience of killing the earwig, not the talk about it, the teacher?
Suzuki Roshi: At that time you needn't feel like a good Buddhist or a sinful monk or think about violating your precepts. When you are working in the garden for some purpose you should be involved in that activity completely. Sometimes you may be mad at the earwigs, but no one can criticize you. If you are expelled from Tassajara because you killed a lot of earwigs, you should go. "Okay, I will go." You should have that much confidence—not confidence, it is more than confidence. You shouldn't have to fight with anyone. If you have that much understanding of what you are doing, that is good— the way is there.
Student: When we say we shouldn't harm sentient beings, earwigs or anything else, do we say that because it is impossible to harm them, or because it is wrong to harm them, or both?
Suzuki Roshi: Both. And we should know that it is not possible. Why it is not possible is because these are just words. Words cannot reach that place. Only when you get caught by words do you say "possible" or "impossible." Killing something, sacrificing something—that is how you actually live every day. Applying Buddha's teaching just to give yourself some excuse, even if it does make you feel better, is a very superficial understanding of Buddhism. You cannot help feeling bad when you kill something. This is also a superficial understanding. But that does not mean that you are doing something wrong, because you are not actually killing. Both are true. But if you say, "Because I am not killing anything it is okay to kill," that is wrong, because you are sticking to an idea or a precept that itself is just words. It is not the true heart, the true feeling of Buddha.
Student: Roshi, every animal has a way of living, of eating, of raising its young, of relating to its world that is in keeping with the particular dharma or dao of its being. Doesn't mankind also have a particular way of living and eating and raising our young that is in keeping with our dharma or dao?
Suzuki Roshi: Not absolutely. Rather, we have to make our best effort to keep the dharma—that's what these words are about. Words are necessary, but even though they are necessary, you shouldn't think they are complete. We should make constant effort to produce new dharma, new precepts. We say, "This is human life." But this human life is for today, not tomorrow. Tomorrow we must have better ways to live. This kind of effort should be continued. When we feel bad it means we should improve our way. But you should not expect a perfect dharma that says clearly "you should" or "you shouldn't." No one can insist on their own way, but we should appreciate their effort to improve the dharma. Does this make sense?
Student: You say that we must always, every day, improve our way, make our best effort. I have also heard you say, "For the true teaching to be passed on, the disciple must surpass the teacher." Can we carry on the dharma even if we don't surpass the teacher?
Suzuki Roshi: Yes. "Surpass" is also a dualistic word, so we should not stick to it. There is no reason why I should feel good or bad if you surpass me. To talk about which is better is just words. Even to create one page of new dharma is very difficult. Even though you feel that you have invented something new, the Buddha is always waiting there for you. Buddha will say, "Oh, come here. Good for you! Come nearer to me. I have some more things for you." It is very hard to surpass his teaching.
In the light there is darkness, but don't take it as darkness. In the dark there is light, but don't see it as light.
First I will talk about the two terms mei and an, "light" and "darkness." Light means the relative, dualistic world of words, the thinking world, the visible world in which we live. Darkness refers to the absolute, where there is no exchange value or materialistic value or even spiritual value—the world that our words and thinking mind cannot reach. Living in the realm of duality, we must have a good understanding of the absolute, which we may think of as a deity. But in Buddhism we do not have any particular idea about a deity. The absolute is the absolute because it is beyond our intellectual or dualistic thinking. We cannot deny this world of the absolute. Many people say that Buddhism is atheism because we have no particular idea of God. We know there is the absolute, but we know it is beyond the limit of our thinking mind, so we don't say so much about it. That is what we mean by an, "darkness."
Meichu ni atatte an ari—"In the light there is darkness." This is a literal translation. But the literal translation doesn't make much sense. So we must understand the actual meaning of ari, "there is." There are two characters for "there is" in Japanese: ari and zai. When we say that there is something on the table, or on the earth, or in Tassajara—something on or in something—we use zai, and when we say, "I have two hands," we use ari. Actually, we say, "There are two hands," or "In you there are two hands." Part of the character for ari means "flesh" or "skin." This shows a very close relationship between light and darkness, like the relationship between my skin and myself. The English sentence "In the light there is darkness" sounds more dualistic. "I have my skin," you may say, or "I have my hand." But your hand or your skin is a part of you, so actually it is not dualistic. Skin is you yourself. Your hands are your hands. In English you say, "I have two hands." But your hands may feel funny when you say this. "Oh! We are a part of you, yet you say you have two hands. What do you mean? Do you mean you have two more hands besides us?" If possible, I think there should be another way of expressing this in English.
In these lines ari means there is a very close relationship between light and darkness. And actually darkness itself is light. Darkness or brightness is within your mind. In your mind you have some standard or measurement of how bright or dark this room is. If it is unusually bright, you may say the room is bright; if it is unusually dark, you may say it is dark. But you can say, "This room is bright," and at the same time, someone else may say, "This room is very dark." Someone who comes from San Francisco at night may say, "Oh, Tassajara is very dark." But someone who comes here from a cave may say, "Tassajara is very bright, like a capital city." The idea of light or dark is within ourselves. Because we have some standard we say light or dark, but actually light is darkness and darkness is light.
Even though we say "darkness," it does not mean that nothing is there. When you have light you can see many things, such as Caucasians and Japanese, men and women, stones and trees. These things appear in the light. When we say "darkness" or "world of the absolute," which is beyond our thinking, you may think this is a world quite different from our human world, but this is also a mistake. If you understand darkness in that way, it is not the darkness meant here.
Some of you are preparing food for Ed and Meg's wedding. You may dish out various foods separately, putting them on different plates. This is soup, this is salad, this is dessert. That is the light. But when you eat, various foods will be mixed up in your tummy. Then there is no soup, no bread, no dessert. At that time they all work together. When the various items are on the plate, they are not yet working, so it is not yet actually food; it is light. When it is in your tummy, it is darkness; but even in darkness there is still lettuce and soup and everything. The food is the same; only as it changes its form does it start to work. In utter darkness things happen that way. In light you feel good; you feel as if you have a special dish in front of you, but the food is not serving its purpose yet.
When you don't know what you are doing, actually you are acting fully, with a full mind. When you are thinking, you are not yet working. When you start to work, both the dark side and the light side are there. When you are actually practicing the Buddhist way, there is a light side and a dark side, and the relationship between light and darkness is this ari relationship, like the relationship between skin and body. You cannot actually say which is skin and which is body.
Anso wo motte o koto nakare—"but don't take it as darkness." Nakare means "do not." Motte means "with." Anso means "dark side" or "dark outlook." The character o means "to meet," implying that you treat the person you meet as a friend. You meet or encounter the way clouds meet a mountain. Here is a Tassajara mountain, there are clouds, and the clouds from the ocean will meet the mountain. This kind of relationship is o. You should not meet people just with the understanding of darkness. If you meet your friend with your eyes shut, ignoring how old he is or how handsome he is, ignoring all his characteristics, you will not meet your friend. That is just a one-sided understanding, because in the darkness there is light. Even though the relationship between you and your friend is very intimate, still your friend is who he is and you are you. Maybe the relationship is like husband and wife. Husband is husband and wife is wife; that is a real relationship. Don't meet your friend without the understanding of light or duality. A close relationship is dark because, if your relationship is very close, you are one with the other person. But still you are you and your friend is who he is.
The third and fourth lines here are parallel to the first and second. They say the same thing as the first and second, but in a different way. "In the dark there is light, but don't see it as light." In darkness, even when we are in an intimate relationship, there is the duality of man and woman. This duality is the light. But you should not see others with the eyes of light only, because the other side of light is darkness. Darkness and light are two sides of one coin.
We are liable to be caught by preconceived ideas. If you have a bad experience with somebody you may think, "Oh, he is a bad person, he is always mean to me." But this may not be so. You are seeing him with the eyes of light only. You should know why he is mean to you. Because the relationship is so close, so intimate, it is more than a relationship between two persons. It is just one. So when he is angry, you will be angry. When one is angry, the other will be angry. You need to understand the other side of light, which is darkness. Then, even though you become angry, you will not feel so bad. "Oh, he is so angry with me because he is so close to me." When you think he is bad it is difficult for you to change your idea of him. It may be true that sometimes he is bad, but right now you don't know whether he is good or bad. You have to see.
We should not cling to the idea of darkness or light; we should not cling to the idea of equality or differentiation. Most people, once they have a grudge against someone, find it almost impossible to change their feeling. But if we are Buddhists we should be able to shift our minds from bad to good and from good to bad. If you are able to do so, "bad" does not mean bad, and "good" does not mean good anymore. But at the same time, good is good and bad is bad. Do you understand? In this way we should understand the relationship between us. There is a poem:
The mother is the blue mountain and the children are white clouds. All day long they are together, yet they do not know who is the mother and who are the children.
The mountain is the mountain and the white clouds are white clouds floating around the mountain like children. There is the blue mountain and there are the white clouds, but they don't know that there are white clouds or blue mountains. Even though they don't know, they know very well—so well that they don't know.
That is the experience you will have in your zazen practice. You will hear insects and the stream. You are sitting and the stream is running, and you hear it. Even though you hear it, you have no idea of stream and no idea of zazen. You are just on the black cushion. You are just there like a blue mountain with white clouds. This kind of relationship is fully explained in these four lines of the Sandokai.
Student: Roshi, which translation are you using?
Suzuki Roshi: We are using several. A translation cannot be perfect. It is difficult, almost impossible, to translate because there are no exact equivalents. Ari here can mean "nothing"— "there is" means "there is not." "Light" means "dark." But "light" doesn't mean anything if it also means "dark." That is why I said "double-edged" earlier. Light? Dark? Which is it? What is it? But still there is both light and dark.
There should not be any questions on this point, but if you have a question please ask me—if you want to get hit! [Laughing.]
Student: Roshi, what about focus? You said that the clouds don't know they're the children of the mountain and vice versa, but when we humans open and arrange our eating bowls, we focus on that without listening to the stream. It is a different activity.
Suzuki Roshi: It is the same activity.
Student: For me it is different.
Suzuki Roshi: That is why you get the stick. [Laughing.] When you really focus there is light and darkness together, but when you are thinking about it there are two sides. Now you are asking a question. When you are asking a question you are thinking, so it is hard for me to answer your question. I may have to be very angry with you. That is the only way. If you get hit you will probably stop thinking about it.
Student: Roshi, why do we shave our heads?
Suzuki Roshi: So that your thinking mind can go as smoothly as this [rubbing his shaved head with his hand]. Bright— dark—very smoothly. And to get rid of ornaments. We should not have anything that is not necessary.
Student: The Diamond Sutra says that we suffer misfortune in this life because of sins or mistakes committed in past lives and that by suffering these misfortunes now, we will work out these mistakes or get retribution for them, atone for them, and open the way for enlightenment. It seems like a very heavy load. I don't understand it. It adds a new dimension to my problem.
Suzuki Roshi: It will help. Because you suffer now does not mean that someone makes you suffer but that your suffering is caused by you yourself. If your understanding is like this you will have no complaints. But at the same time, if you understand your life just from the viewpoint of karma, the dualistic explanation of why we suffer, you are already caught by the idea of karma. We should be free from that one-sided view. Even though we say "karma," karma doesn't exist. But if karma doesn't exist, then you may say, "Whatever I do, it's all right." That means that you are caught by the idea of darkness. The other day we discussed why we kill earwigs. We have to kill them, but that doesn't mean that it is all right to kill them. It is not all right. We should understand our activity from both sides. If you don't feel so good about it, you should make more effort; you should find out how to protect the vegetables without disturbing the earwigs. But you should not waste too much time or your practice will suffer. Anyway, you have to continue to find some good ideas one after another.
Student: Roshi, what is the difference between understanding things or activities from both sides and not understanding them at all?
Suzuki Roshi: Oh—there's no need to talk about not understanding at all [laughs]. If you have a chance to listen to a lecture or read a book, you will understand something.
Truth is truth. There are not two truths, only one. When you understand truth only with your mind, you may feel that is the truth. But compared to your actual activity or feeling or life, the truth that you understand with your mind is not the actual truth. Because our actual life is not as easy as our thinking, it is easy to be convinced that some idea we have is the perfect truth. Yet for us it is not true because that kind of thinking does not accord with our actual life.
So there are two ways of understanding the truth. One way is intellectual truth. "We understand," we say, but that understanding is just an intellectual understanding. Whether we understand it or not, truth is truth—whether Buddha appeared in this world or not, truth is truth. In the second way, something may be true for a buddha or an enlightened person, but for us it is not true. We cannot accept the fundamental truth as it is, so for us it does not seem true. That is the truth we work with in our practice. From the viewpoint of our practice, truth is not always true.
Student: Although many practitioners in Buddha's time had attained samadhi, * Buddha did not accept this samadhi until it was set round with equanimity. Is that what you just said?
Suzuki Roshi: Yes. To stress some conception is not our way. We put more emphasis on our actual life. That is why we must practice. That all of us have buddha nature is true whether Buddha said it or not. But unfortunately most of us do not realize we have buddha nature. I don't know why.
Student: When one comes to see the darkness in the light and the light in the darkness, do they finally become the same thing or do they always remain separately darkness and light?
Suzuki Roshi: Yes, they are the same thing, but our lazy mind separates darkness from light. To plunge into the light, to find darkness in light, to find Buddha nature in perfect zazen is our way. Whether you are sleepy or not, good students or bad students, you should sit. That is the only way to have darkness in your bright dualistic practice.
Light and dark oppose one another like front and back foot in walking.
We are still talking about reality from the viewpoint of independency. Dependency and independency are actually two sides of one coin.
People may say that the Japanese are very tough. But that is just one side of the Japanese personality. The other side is softness. Because of their Buddhist background, they have been trained that way for a long time. The Japanese people are very kind.
We have a children's song that describes a hero called Momotaro, the Peach Boy. There was an old couple who lived near the riverside. One day the old woman picked up a peach from the stream and came back to her home. And from the peach, out came Momotaro. The Japanese children sing a song about him: "He was very strong but very kind and gentle." He is the ideal Japanese character. What do you call it? You must have some expression for it.
Student: Folk hero? Yes, folk hero. Without a soft mind you cannot be really strong. If Momotaro did not have this side of his character, if he was not very sympathetic, he could not be really strong. A person who is strong just for himself is not so strong, but a strong person who is very kind will support people and can really be a folk hero. When we have both a soft side and a strong side, we can be strong in a real way.
It may be easier to fight and win than to endure without crying when you are defeated. You should be able to allow your foe to beat you, okay? This is very difficult. But unless you can endure the bitterness of defeat, you cannot be really strong. Readiness to be weak can be a sign of strength. We say, "The willow tree cannot be broken by the snow." The weight of the snow may break a strong tree's branches. But with a willow, though the snow may bend or twist the branches, even a heavy snow like the one we had last year cannot break them. Bamboo also bends easily. It looks quite weak, but no snow can break it.
"Like front and back foot in walking." Darkness and brightness—absolute and relative—are a pair of opposites, like front and back feet when we walk. This is a very good way of explaining oneness, or the actual function of a pair of opposites. It expresses how we apply pairs of opposites, like delusion and enlightenment, reality and idea, good and bad, weak and strong, in our everyday practice. People who feel they are strong may find it difficult to be weak. People who feel they are weak may never try to be strong. That is quite usual. But sometimes we should be strong and sometimes we should be weak. If you remain weak always or if you always want to be strong, then you cannot be strong in the true sense.
When you learn something, you should be able to teach it to people. You should put the same effort into teaching as into learning. And if you want to teach, you should be humble enough to learn something. Then you can teach. If you try to teach just because you know something, you cannot teach anything. When you are ready to be taught by someone, then, if necessary, you can teach people in the true sense of the word. So, to learn is to teach and to teach is to learn. If you think you are always a student, you cannot learn anything. The reason you learn something is in order to teach others after you have learned it.
There is no fixed moral standard; rather, you find your moral code when you try to teach others. Before Japan was defeated in the war and surrendered unconditionally, the Japanese people thought they had a moral teaching that was absolutely right. If they only observed that code, they believed, they would not make any mistakes. But that moral code, unfortunately, was set up at the beginning of the Meiji period (1868–1912). After losing the war, they lost confidence in their morality and didn't know what kind of morals they should observe. They didn't know what to do. But actually it shouldn't be so difficult to find one's moral code. I said to people at that time, "You have children. When you raise them, you will naturally know the moral code for yourself." When you think the moral code is just for yourself, that is a one-sided understanding. A moral code is, rather, to help others. The moral code you find when you want to help and be kind to others will naturally be good for you as well.
It is said, "To go east one hundred miles is to go west one hundred miles." When the moon is high in the sky, the moon in the water will be deep. But usually people will observe the moon above the water and not see the moon in the water. That the moon is deep means that the moon is high. The moon in the water is independent and the moon over the water is independent; but the moon over the water is also the moon in the water. We should understand this. When you are strong, you should be strong. You should be very tough. But that toughness comes from your gentle kindness. When you are kind, you should just be kind. But that does not mean you are not strong.
Women may not be physically as strong as men. Because of that they are often stronger than men. Actually, we don't know who is stronger. When we have our own completely independent nature, our strength is absolutely equal with everyone else's. If you are involved in comparing who is stronger, you or I, then you don't have real strength. When you are completely independent, one with your own nature, you are an absolute power in a relative situation. When different kinds of people are competing with each other, they are not so strong. When each becomes completely himself or herself, they have absolute power. Do you understand this point?
So light and darkness, although they are a pair of opposites, are equal, as when one footstep is ahead and the other is behind. When you walk, the step ahead immediately becomes the step behind. Is a step with your right foot the step ahead or the step behind? Which is it? Which is brightness and which is darkness? It is difficult to tell.
When you are walking, there is no foot ahead or behind. If you stop walking and think about it, sometimes the right foot may be ahead and the left foot may be behind. But when your feet are actually walking, when you are actually practicing the way, there is no light or darkness, no foot ahead or foot behind. If I say that you should just sit zazen without thinking, you may feel that you should not have any thoughts. You will be caught by the idea that the right foot is ahead and the left foot is behind. Then you cannot walk anymore. When you are actually walking, you have no idea of left foot or right foot. But if you are self-consciously aware of right foot or left foot, you cannot walk or run.
As I have said, before you chew your food there is rice, pickle, and soup. When you have chewed your food there is no rice, no pickle, no soup. After you mix the food in your mouth, it will be digested in your tummy, and it will serve its purpose. Even so, we should serve one thing after another, and dessert should come last. There is an order. But even though there is an order, you should chew your food and mix it, or else the food will not serve its purpose. It is necessary to think about it, to have a recipe, but it is also necessary to chew and mix everything up.
This is a very good interpretation of reality and a good illustration of how we practice our way and of the kind of activity that is going on in our everyday lives. With these lines, Sekito's interpretation of reality in the light of independency is completed.
First Student: Roshi, when you say "independency," I'm confused as to whether you mean "independence" or "interdependency."
Suzuki Roshi: "Independency." Excuse me. "Interdependency" is more like "dependency."
Another Student: We have the noun "dependency," so we can have "independency."
Suzuki Roshi: But do you have "independency"?
First Student: Now we have "independency"!
Suzuki Roshi: "Independent" is too strong. If you are independent—[striking the table with his stick]—that's all! You don't care about anything. That is not what we mean. When you are independent, you are in a very vulnerable or dangerous situation.
Student: People think they are independent. Isn't this a delusion?
Suzuki Roshi: Yes. When they think, "I am independent," it is not true. You are dependent on everything.
Student: I can't figure out how you can tell the difference between what a woman is supposed to be and what a man is supposed to be. If a woman competes with a man someone may say she's weak, but how do you know what a woman or a man is supposed to be like in the first place?
Suzuki Roshi: I don't mean weak. If men and women compete and are compared with each other by setting up some standards or categories, sometimes the man will be stronger and sometimes the woman will be stronger. Anyway, you cannot always be strong. But when you become yourself, a woman or a man absolutely, you have absolute value always and no one can replace you.
Student: I have some trouble with the relevancy of this lecture. I'd like you to say one more thing about it, but I don't know what. I can't quite see what it's all about. I do understand what it's about when you are talking about opposites and things like that.
Suzuki Roshi: The purpose of what I am saying is to open a different approach to your understanding of reality. You are observing things from just one side or the other, and you stick to some one-sided understanding. That is why I am talking in this way. It is necessary.
Strictly speaking, Buddhists have no teaching. We have no God or deities. We don't have anything. What we have is nothingness, that's all. So how is it possible for Buddhists to be religious? What kind of composure do we have? That will be the question. The answer is not some special idea of God or a deity, but rather, the understanding of the reality we are always facing. Where are we? What are we doing? Who is he? Who is she? When we observe things in this way, we don't need a special teaching about God because everything is God for us. Moment after moment we are facing God. And each one of us is also God or Buddha. So we don't need any special idea of God. That may be the point.
Student: Roshi, that sounds very good to me, but then why do we take vows? For instance, when Ed and Meg got married, you said they should take refuge in the Triple Treasure (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) and observe the ten cardinal precepts.
Suzuki Roshi: We take vows and observe precepts, and we read sutras. But even though you read scriptures and observe precepts, without right understanding they will be precepts of either light or darkness, and when you are caught in this way or rely too much on precepts or scriptures, they will not be Buddhist precepts or scriptures any more.
Student: Suppose I take a precept that says not to speak ill of others. If I don't follow the precept, it seems like there is no reason for it at all, and if I do follow it, it seems like I'm being caught by it. I just don't understand. If precepts are not rigid, they don't seem to be of any use at all, and if they are rigid, they don't seem to be consistent with the Sandokai.
I have always wondered about that part in the meal chant where we say, "to avoid all evil and practice good." I asked you about it, and you said that we should just pay attention to what we are doing. If that is so, why don't we just say that? Why don't we say, "I vow to practice zazen in my everyday life and not be caught by rules?" Why go through this "good and evil" thing? It's kind of phony.
Suzuki Roshi: No-o-o. You are just trying to argue with me, that's all. [Laughing.] You need precepts, but actually it isn't possible to violate precepts. You cannot. But you feel as if you are. If you feel that way, you should accept your feelings, and if you accept your feelings then you have to say, "excuse me," or "I'm sorry," or something. That is also quite natural. "Don't kill" is a dead precept. "Excuse me" is an actual working precept, which is not one foot behind or one foot forward. Do you understand? If you read the precepts and say, "Okay, I will do it," that is precepts. And when you have violated a precept, you may say, "Oh, excuse me." That is quite natural.
Student: Some of the precepts do feel natural—for instance, that I shouldn't say nasty things about people. But the precept about taking harmful drugs or intoxicants seems unnatural. If all the precepts were natural and I just wanted to do things naturally, then that would make more sense to me.
Suzuki Roshi: If you feel like that, you might also say, "It is quite natural for me to be born and live in this world." But is it natural? You have already assumed something that you shouldn't assume. Why did you come here? That may already be a big mistake. [Laughing.]
Student: When I came here they didn't ask me about precepts. They just wanted to know if I had $2.50 a day.
Suzuki Roshi: Good bargain. But it cannot be so simple. Anyway, you should say, "Oh, I'm sorry." When you are born you cannot say so. Now you can. So you should say, "I am sorry to be your daughter or your son. Excuse me. I have caused you a lot of trouble." That is actually following the precepts.
Student: Roshi, sometimes I feel this way about listening to lectures: Once I was just walking along and someone came and said, "Did you realize that when you are walking, one foot is ahead and the other is behind?" No! For a long time that amazed me. I wondered why he ever asked me a question like that, and I thought about it a lot. It was a very strange thing, and it occupied my attention. After a long time, I found that I was just walking again and didn't think so much about it. But one day as I was walking, another man came up and said, "Did you realize that when you are walking, one foot is ahead and the other is behind?" And I feel at that point now. I still don't understand it at all, but I have to deal with it somehow. Half of me says, "What's the relevance of it?" because it doesn't bother me anymore, and the other half sa