The Awakening of Faith – Talk 5
April 20, 1984 Dharma Talk by Dainin Katagiri Roshi
Previous | Next | List | Series: Awakening of Faith
Transcript
This transcript is in draft stage.
0:00
All explanations by words are provisional and without validity, for they are merely used in accordance with illusions and are incapable of denoting Suchness.
(From The Awakening of Faith, translated by Yoshito S. Hakeda, 1967.)
So here [it says], “all explanations by words are provisional.” Provisional means everything exists [relatively]. I cannot exist without others. So if I call myself I, that concept of the I comes from the concept of you, and then I say I. Do you understand that one? So I itself doesn’t have its own substance, which causes it to exist by itself. So if you are not there, I cannot exist. I exist depending on you, in relation to you.
Everything is like this. This table: if we say table, [there are] many kinds of tables. So we don’t know what the table is. If you say “table,” [there are] many kinds of tables there. So this table exists in relation to other kinds of tables.
So the [word] provisional means everything exists in relation to others. That’s why last time I mentioned, right exists in relation to left. If you say “right,” very naturally there is “left.” Consciously or unconsciously, completely beyond your speculation. If you say white, very naturally there is black. So very naturally there is a relative world there. White doesn’t exist alone, by itself. So if there is no color or no black, very naturally [there is] no white. In a sentence, [if there is] no subject, very naturally [there is] no predicate. Because the sentence doesn’t make sense.
I said the other day, the loss of evil results in the loss of good, very naturally. If you want to have good, very naturally you should get evil too. Good and evil exist simultaneously. This is [the meaning of] provisional. Provisional [means] everything exists in relation with others.
So Buddhism is kind of epistemology, not ontology.
In philosophy, we always try to understand substance. And then […] all beings come from this substance. That’s philosophy. Buddhism is [explained in a] sense as a kind of ontology, but that is not the main purpose of the teaching. Finally [it is] epistemology. So even though you say substance, so-called dharma or truth, we don’t accept the dharma ontologically. Very naturally that truth, dharma, exists in relation to the phenomenal world. So in the process of relation with the phenomenal world, then we can accept the truth, whatever it is.
So very different. Buddhism is kind of a theory of the teaching of ontology, but it’s not ontology, it’s epistemology.
Question: What do those two terms mean? I mean, maybe someone could define them; I don’t know exactly.
Katagiri Roshi: Well, ontology means from where the world comes. Do you understand? So you should find the substance, what is the substance, what is the origin of the world, what is the origin of human beings, from where they come. Philosophically, anyway, we research.
Question: And epistemology?
Katagiri Roshi: Epistemology is the study of knowing. The study of knowing or seeing means, in the relative world you have to have your own object, in relation between subject and object, and then [you can recognize something].
Question: The study of what can be known?
Katagiri Roshi: Yes. [What] can be known, or can… I don’t know. Heh. Anyway, you should check it. Alright?
Question: Okay.
Katagiri Roshi: So that’s why here is also truth. We are studying the [narrow] “truth”, but truth is a kind of absolute, because [it’s] beyond the words, that’s why all explanation don’t hit the mark. If so, what is the truth? Truth is the absolute. If you accept this truth as an absolute, it’s kind of a substance of the world. Do you understand? Source. From where all sentient beings come. And then phenomenon comes from this absolute. Something like this.
“All explanation by words are provisional and without validity…” So no quality of existence, if you explain.
“… for they are merely used in accordance with illusions and are incapable of denoting Suchness.”
Because one’s relative recognition is incapable of understanding the true [face of the thing]. That’s why incapable. Nothing to explain. Even a table you cannot explain, in order to know the real table. No. If you explain, the explanation makes you confused, because there are many kinds of tables there. So you don’t know finally what real table you want.
The same applies to meditations. Zazen: we say zazen, but if you say meditations, [there are] many many kinds of meditations. Christian meditation, yoga meditation, Zen meditation, Vipassana meditation – more than a hundred meditations. And then, what is the meditation? We don’t know what the meditation is. Don’t you think so?
Even though you look at yourself – [I] look at Katagiri [myself], but finally I don’t know who I am, because I can see many kinds of Katagiris. So, finally I don’t know – no particular Katagiri. But if I don’t call myself Katagiri, all of you will be very confused; that’s why temporarily I have to put a certain name on me. So you call me Katagiri, I say “Yes, sir” – but I’m not real Katagiri.
So, nothing to explain [in] words.
11:50
So next,
The term Suchness likewise has no attributes which can be verbally specified.
The term suchness likewise has no attribute, no form, no mark. So it’s the same applied to the term suchness. If you explain the [suchness] using the term suchness or truth, you miss the mark, you miss the most important point of suchness, of what the suchness is. Because suchness likewise has no attribute, form or mark. No smell, no color, no form, no marks.
The term Suchness is, so to speak, the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words.
If so, why do we use the term suchness or truth? Because “the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words.” Do you understand that one?
You don’t?
Someone: No.
Katagiri Roshi: Anyone, do you understand that one?
Question: Do you have to have a word because you have to have something that in this world we can use to understand.
Katagiri Roshi: Sure. But particularly suchness. This book mentions if you use a word, it’s not real truth. In this world there is nothing to be explained in words. If so, why do you use a word?
Someone: Like a finger pointing at the moon?
Katagiri Roshi: Sure. But already this book mentions in that way. That’s why explanation by words are provisional.
Anybody?
Someone: What are you asking?
Katagiri Roshi: Well, if the explanation by words is useless, why don’t you stop using it?
Someone: Well, they’re useful, but they’re not true.
Katagiri Roshi: Sure.
Someone: We don’t have much other choice.
Katagiri Roshi: [Chuckles.] [Some laughter.]
It is just like the existence of God, huh? You don’t understand, but everyone says God exists, so you jump into it. No other choice. Something like that.
Someone: No, I meant… Do you mean this particular word or any word?
Katagiri Roshi: Any word.
Someone: You need to use words to realize the limitation of words.
Katagiri Roshi: Mm-hmm. That’s right.
Someone: Words are a tool, like a hammer, but you don’t have to believe them.
Someone: Aren’t they necessary to organize our life?
Katagiri Roshi: Mm-hmm. Right.
Yes, that’s right. Words are very important things to organize. When you see the space between you and your object, very naturally you need words, to organize. [Unintelligible] Do you understand?
Just like a technique: a technique to climb the mountains. The technique itself is important for the mountaineer when they have a certain space between the climber and the rock [face of the] mountain. At that time he needs the perfect balance of his life and also – what what would you say – a [sober economy] of his performance. That is a technique.
The technique itself is important, but you cannot understand the mountains just by technique. So behind the technique, you need the spirit. Do you understand that one?
You cannot understand by technique. By technique you cannot explain. You cannot hit the mark what the mountain is, what the climber is.
The same applies to the words. You always create some gap [or] space between subject and object. The words [are needed] to organize, to keep your right balance. Always create, because you exist right in the middle of space between subject and object. Do you understand?
If you don’t understand, [think of] the climber, mountaineer. [Imagine] yourself, how to climb the mountains. The mountain itself is exactly the same as your life. Nothing to explain. All you have to do is just climb! That’s it. But you cannot just climb, because you live in the relative world, which is dichotomized between you and the mountains. So very naturally, you are confused very much. So you have to study the mountains as your object. This is a technique. This is words. Through the words you can learn the technique. Through the words you can learn what the mountains [are], what you are, what the weather is. And then you can organize, you can keep your right balance between mountain [and you]. Alright? This is the words.
So very naturally […] nothing to explain, but we need the words. […] By the words you can see something, you can see a way to approach, in what direction to go.
But finally, using the words means letting go of the words. You have to let go of the words. Otherwise you don’t know what the truth is. You don’t know what the table is. If you use table as a term, that term table means to give you a suggestion to go beyond the term table, in order to know something real. Behind the table, within the table, or [beyond] the table, there is [some] truth, something real.
Something real means, using the term makes us confused, because many kinds of tables, so you don’t know what is a table. So this is also table; another table; many kinds of table. Finally through the words you are very confused: what is a table? So if you want to know a real table, no table. Because many tables – so no table. So the term table means no table. No table means go beyond the term table.
Look at the note, page 33, in regard to the third paragraph:
In regard to the sentence “The term Suchness is, so to speak, the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words,” a Korean monk, Wǒnhyo, in his commentary on this text written in the early part of the eighth century says: “It is just as though one stops the voices with a voice.” Following this comment by Wǒnhyo, Fazang explains: “It is just like saying ‘Be quiet!’ If this voice were not there, other voices would not be made to cease.”
That’s pretty good commentary.
Any other questions? Is that alright? Do you understand?
So that’s why we need the words, in order to cause [us] to go beyond the words. To let you know the limits of the words – that’s why we use the words. Limit of the words means let you go beyond the words; that’s why we use the words. In other words, you should know the spirit behind the words.
Just like a mountain: you should know the spirit of the mountains behind the technique. But technique is important for us. But you cannot climb the mountains always by the technique.
The same applies to anything. Your life, too.
So that’s why we have to know the vastness of existence. That is the spirit behind you. Behind you, behind all sentient beings.
But usually we become very crazy about terms. [He chuckles.] Any kind of religion, always we become crazy about the term. That’s why we are fighting always. Do you understand that one?
But Buddhism always mentions, go beyond the words. If you don’t believe me, read the Diamond Sutra: “Bodhisattvas are not bodhisattvas, that’s why we call them bodhisattvas.” Always. That means you should know the spirit behind the term bodhisattva, alright? That’s why we say so.
“No nose, no mind, no body” means you should know the spirit behind the term “eyes, ears.” What’s going on there around your nose? What’s the spirit behind the nose? Spirit means vastness of existence. That’s why Prajñāpāramitā says “no nose, no eyes, no ears, no mind, no bodies,” anyway. “No confusion, no disappearance, no appearance,” et cetera. Completely no birth, no disappearance.
So you are born in this world, that is called born, birth. But you should know the spirit of the birth; from where it comes.
That is, in the beginning, page 32, we say,
That which is called “the essential [nature] of the Mind” is unborn and is imperishable.
Like this.
So that means, simply speaking, anyway, you should know the spirit behind the term, always. This is the point of the Buddhist teaching, always. Don’t be crazy about the terms. That’s why […] Zen always says the real teaching is transmitted beyond terms in words.
That is not only Zen, [but] general Buddhist teaching.
29:02
But the essence of Suchness itself cannot be put an end to, …
So, if there is nothing to be explained in words – if so, why don’t you throw away the word ‘truth’? But you cannot take away the truth itself. Even though you can go beyond the term the truth, it doesn’t mean to destroy or to throw away truth itself. So, […] you should know the spirit of the truth, of existence, of being, behind the term truth. What is the real truth? Which is living vividly, freshly. What is the truth?
That’s why the essence of the truth – essence of the truth doesn’t mean substance of the truth. Essence of the truth means real truth, which is really alive, vividly, in your life. It’s not a concept.
So “the essence of the suchness itself cannot be put an end to, …”
… for all things in their Absolute aspect are real; …
So you have to know the truth through each individual. Floors, tables, microphones, everything. Through the microphone, you must know the truth.
Truth is really dynamic energies, power, force, strength. Which is really alive. Where? Not a particular place – in the relative world. [It is] not separate from the relative. If you say the truth, we always think the truth exists far from us, somewhere, but [that] is not real truth. The truth is real, powerful energies, in dynamism. Where? In the relative.
So, if you say truth, truth is something eternal. Before you were born, or before the world is born; before God exists, or before Buddha is born in this world. Whatever happens, truth is truth. Even if the end of the world comes, truth is truth. Even if you [how] know the beginning of the world comes, well, truth is truth.
So, always truth. [That] means truth is permanent.
But in Buddhism, permanence is understood or considered in three points.
One point is, permanent is [to] constantly exist. Constancy. Just like a philosophical understanding, substance, forever exists. This is also a concept of permanence.
Secondly, permanence is that something separated at the moment and moment, goes constantly. Alright? It is something separated, but it goes. Can you see? Do you understand?
Question: You mean goes like “leaves”, or goes like “continues”?
Katagiri Roshi: Everything is chopped in pieces, but it seems to be going constantly. Just like, what would you say… Let’s imagine the film of a movie. The film of a movie consists of thousands of frames. And they put it in a machine, and each moment is separated, all the frames are separated. But as the machine is going – everything is separate, but it’s going. That is also called permanence. Do you understand?
Third is, it is not separated, but it’s constantly each moment comes together and moving. I don’t know how I can say it. Just like the water of Ganges River. The Water of Ganges River, the water itself consists of many kinds of molecules, but it’s not separate. They completely come together, and also are moving. It’s not permanence which is still; it’s moving, changing. It’s changing, but it doesn’t change; it’s really there. Do you understand?
Question: I don’t understand what the difference between two and three is.
Question: Synthesis is like three?
Katagiri Roshi: Well… you cannot use a synthesis. It seems two contradictory situations there, alright? If you see it, it exists exactly, which is still, which is permanent. That exists permanently. But it’s moving, it’s changing. Changing means, from moment to moment it’s changing. But molecules, or atoms, or separately, just like a film. Film is each frame separately exists.
The you and I of snows, each frame of a snow. Look at the one spot, alright? And the snows, they fall to the lake and the water, the snow disappears in a moment. Next moment, snow comes again! If you look at that moment, it always disappears, next moment it appears. So if you look at the one point there, you always see something permanent: snow exists always there. That is so-called permanent. That is everything exists separately, but it’s going. It seems to be permanent; just like a film.
Question: But wouldn’t it be a matter of how you focus? If you focus on one, it’s one, and if you focus on the other, it’s…
Katagiri Roshi: Changing.
Question: But both are happening all at once, together.
Katagiri Roshi: Yes, simultaneous. Together.
Question: So, it depends on which one you’re focusing on, but that doesn’t mean that the other one isn’t right there.
Katagiri Roshi: Sure. So as a whole, anyway, both exist. The same applies to the truth. Truth doesn’t separate from us. Okay?
If you say truth is permanent, very naturally, well, we always hang on to the term, something. But [the] truth is changing. That’s why I said the truth is a very powerful energy in dynamism, but where is it? It is in the relative, which is constant change. So change and permanence comes together.
That’s why Dōgen Zenji says, “Impermanence is buddha-nature.” In other words, change, the human world, is buddha-nature. We can say so. But it’s not a philosophical understanding. You can see the human world like this.
That’s why in the three kinds of understanding of permanence, that is, philosophically, you can set up something which exists forever without change, so-called immutability. But that is a really a philosophical term. On the other hand, it is changing, but it’s really permanent. That is just like a film, and the snow. Okay? And the third one is, constantly one thing exists there, but it’s moving. Just like the water of the Ganges River.
So it is permanent, but it’s not permanent. Look at the table. It is permanent. You believe it is permanent! It is real. But I don’t think it is real. It’s moving.
So that’s why if you say “permanent”, very naturally it’s not permanent, it’s changing. This is Buddhistic understanding anyway. Alright?
That’s why it says here, permanent, you cannot explain the truth by the words, but you cannot destroy the truth. Because truth always exists, is always working, operating in the relative world. That’s why through each individual life, you have to know the spirit behind. That’s why I say, you should find the spirit behind, you should know the spirit behind, because there is the truth there, which is permanent.
So that’s why you have to use the words. Words are provisional, but through the provisional beings, you have to know the something eternal. Moment is moment; next moment it disappears. But through the moment, very naturally, real moment, limit of the moment, is the truth.
That’s why even though ancient people don’t have any modern physics, but [still] 2500 years ago they knew how many moments a day consists of. [He chuckles.] It’s amazing. Only by zazen, only through meditation, they found that complicated stuff.
That’s why here it says, “But the essence of Suchness itself cannot be put an end to, for all things are real.” That’s why all things are real. [All] phenomenal worlds are real…
… nor is there anything which needs to be pointed out as real, for all things are equally in the state of Suchness.
So, do you understand this one?
[Tape change.]
… Table is a table provisionally, but it’s not provisional, it is the truth.
It should be understood that all things are incapable of being verbally explained or thought of; hence the name Suchness.
So, you cannot explain; there is completely nothing to be explained; that’s why we say it is called the truth, or suchness. But that suchness or truth … you cannot explain it. But it exists in the relative world. Alright?
44:40
And next,
Question: If such is the meaning of the principle of Mahayana, how is it possible for men to conform themselves to and enter into it?
Because it’s a very contradictory situation there. It’s very difficult for us to have a spiritual security or stability or majesty there, in life. It’s very difficult, because it is the truth, but simultaneously you cannot explain the truth. So, should I forget [about it]? No, you cannot forget… So, through each existence we should know the truth there. And truth always operates in the relative world. That’s why it’s very difficult to know how is it possible for men to conform themselves.
So, the answer is,
If they understand that, concerning all things, though they are spoken of, there is neither that which speaks nor that which can be spoken of, and though they are thought of, there is neither that which thinks nor that which can be thought of, then they are said to have conformed to it. And when they are freed from their thoughts, they are said to have entered into it.
There is a conformity. So, in order to conform yourself to this real reality, first, you should know everything seems to be real, but it does not seem to be real.
So, in the Zen stories, last Wednesday we studied a pointer: “From where seeing and not seeing, hearing and not hearing, speaking and not speaking, understanding and not understanding come from.” That means, you cannot immediately judge the microphone, so-called the truth, so-called “I understand this microphone.” [Because] simultaneously, you don’t understand the microphone, because microphone is already something [that is] the shadow of the microphone, fabricated by your consciousness. So, very naturally, you understand the microphone according to the words, according to the custom, according to the preconceptions. So, you understand it. But you don’t understand the microphone exactly. That is the point always. That’s why you should understand the microphone, but please take [your] time: you don’t understand the microphone.
So, very naturally, you understand the microphone, but you don’t understand the microphone. It means, there is no particular object, so-called microphone, which you have understood. Because you don’t understand the microphone really. So, no object. You should [know] there is an object, but no object. That is our practice; constantly our practice. That means, take time, give space to polish your understanding, to refine your understanding.
That is called no microphone, no object. Object, and no object. Thought, or no thought.
Here it says, […] “though they are spoken of, there is neither that which speaks, nor that which can be spoken of.”
Very naturally, there is an object, so-called microphone, you can speak of. But what you can speak of the microphone is not the real microphone you want to speak of. Because you are always going around, not the center of the microphone. You cannot hit the bullseye of the microphone’s life.
So, very naturally, you are playing with the words. You are going around, just hanging around the microphone. That is called explanation.
So very naturally, you don’t speak of the real microphone. That’s why “no microphone”. That means there is a microphone which cannot be spoken of. So that means no object.
So very naturally, that’s why in Zen Buddhism [we say] you should hold it, next, let to go. This practice is in both. Because you always hold it, because we see the object. The moment when you see the object, you already hold it. But next moment, you should practice letting go. Let it go. Open your hand. That is Zen practice, always.
But here it says in the same way, but in a different explanation. So that is, if you practice like this, this is called conformity.
Conformity means not really submission, but to be submissive or to be obedient. Or openness, kind of openness. Simultaneously, you should fit yourself to the real microphone’s life.
You should be submissive to the microphone because without the object you cannot exist. So very naturally you should accept all objects. [That] means [the] world.
And then next moment, you become submissive, obedient to your object – but don’t rush into your object in order to grasp it. Let it go. That means “no object.” That no object, let it go, is really to make you conform yourself to the real life of the microphone. Do you understand? Take time, and then very naturally you can see the spirit behind the microphone.
Alright? The spirit behind the microphone. This is our practice, constantly. That is called conformity.
And then, that is not a matter of discussion about conformity, conformity is really something alive in the process of practice. You should do it, every day. That is called enter into.
Because [there is] no space to bring your thought into it. Because if I see the object at this moment, very naturally I must be submissive to the microphone. Because surrender, complete surrender. [He laughs.] Without the microphone I cannot exist. So [the relationship] between the microphone and Katagiri, at the moment when I see it, it’s a very close relation there. So I must be really bounded up with microphone’s existence. Completely beyond the words. So that is submissive or obedient. Straightforward.
And then next, you have to fit into its life. That means take time, and understand it, as best as you can. And then, very naturally, you can see the spirit behind the microphone, behind the subject which [is] looking at this microphone. And then, very naturally, the microphone’s life comes to my life, and then I go to the microphone’s life. That is oneness. That is called enlightenment; enter into enlightenment. This is just the practice. Constantly you should do [this].
That’s why here it says, “… there is neither that which thinks, nor that which can be thought of, then they are said to have conformed to it.”
“And when they are freed from their thoughts…” – freed from their thoughts means practice – “… they are said to have entered into it.”
Do you have questions?
57:30
Question: Hojo-san? In your lecture on Wednesday, I think you were talking about creativity. Creativity as being truth, or real working.
Katagiri Roshi: Mm-hmm.
Questioner: Is that because it expresses the spirit behind the words?
Katagiri Roshi: Mm-hmm. Creativity is spirit and…
Questioner: Form at the same time?
Katagiri Roshi: Well, yeah. The phenomenal world comes together, working together. That is creativity. Creative life.
You cannot have creative life only by words or by techniques. Because you don’t understand mountains by the technique, by the words: you have to be one with the mountains and you. You have to accept the mountains, through which you can learn your life. So mountain’s life is not the mountain’s life separate from you; mountains and you become one. At that time, there is creativity that comes up. That creativity makes you called mountaineer.
59:28
Question: When you were explaining about the three different kinds of permanence? In the second kind, you said something separated moment after moment, it goes…
Katagiri Roshi: Together.
Questioner: I still don’t understand what you mean by goes. Do you mean like, continuing to move?
Katagiri Roshi: Continuing to move. Changing.
It’s moving, but as a whole it seems to exist permanently. But it’s not real permanence, because it’s moving, it’s change. But as a whole it seems to be permanent. Just like a movie film; think of the movie film. It’s separate, and then when it’s moving, the film operates, but each frame is separate. But when it operates, already there are pictures on the screen which exist permanently. So as a whole, there is always a certain story there. But completely each frame is different.
Questioner: Well it seems to me, on the third kind, that even though you can say that something, like the Ganges River, is one thing that’s not separated, it’s separated just as much as the movie is separated, it’s several different things coming together in one unit.
Katagiri Roshi: Well, the third one is the opposite way to look at permanence. The second way is in terms of a moment. Momentarily, everything is separated, alright? But the third point is that we look at everything as a whole, but it’s separate anyway, it’s moving. Separate means moving.
In other words, if you look at a diamond, it’s very solid. Very solid, permanent. But it’s moving. Inside, molecules of diamond really oscillate very quickly, at super-speed, which makes a diamond solid. Just like that. So, it’s permanent, but it’s not permanent. It’s very solid, the hardest entity in this world, but it’s moving. That is the third.
Questioner: And the first one is something that you perceive as not moving at all?
Katagiri Roshi: Yeah, not moving at all. That is a philosophical idea. Everyone understands like that. If you say permanence, something which exists permanently, very naturally you think so. Because it is immutable.
Questioner: But that’s just a way of looking at it.
Someone: An imaginary way.
Katagiri Roshi: Imaginary, but it’s not imaginary exactly… Philosophical understanding, but in a sense it is really true. Because even though it’s changing, it exists forever. You know?
So in a sense it’s true, but we are really cheated by the words, from the third meaning of permanence. Alright? It is a part of the truth. So it’s alright. Because we build up a philosophy like that. So that means we see the picture of the existence just like that, in terms of philosophy. So if you say something exists permanently, it is something immutable. Of course. Without change. It’s [gold]. It’s really there. But it is not real. Still, it is a part of the truth.
So that’s why we have to understand the [first] permanence in terms of the second and third. Alright?
So in terms of the first idea of the permanence, that is very dualistic. Very dualistic. The second and third, we understand the permanence in relation with the human world.
Someone: It sounds like this is like the three natures of Yogachara, where they have the first being kind of philosophical or dualistic view, and the second is we realize the relativity of things, and the third view [is] absolute reality which is beyond any idea we can put on it. Is that… are you describing it from that point of view? Or in terms of three?
Katagiri Roshi: No, that is a little bit different idea. Because that is a teaching of how we should understand the function of the human mind. But now I am talking about the concept of permanence. Okay? Permanence. So in terms of that idea or teaching, we can understand – yes, in a sense. But the topic is different.
Someone: Okay. I thought you were describing permanence from the three different points of view they were talking about. But it’s not, though.
Katagiri Roshi: Not exactly.
Question: So those three points, they’re not alternative definitions of permanence. All three make up what we, with one word, call permanence.
Katagiri Roshi: Because it’s related, related with human life. So no particular ideas, so-called immutability, which you have thought.
1:07:54
Question: Hojo-san, in this paragraph, it says, if they understand then they have conformed to it.
Katagiri Roshi: Not understand. We have to practice.
Later, this book explains in a concrete way about conformity, more in detail. But here it says simply we have to practice conformity, and then, through the conformity, you can enter into enlightenment or nirvana.
Questioner: So, is the original, do they use another word, other than understand there? Or is that just kind of a…
Katagiri Roshi: Conformity?
Questioner: No, they say, “if they understand” – do they just mean a broader understanding, or originally did they use another word for understand? Do you know what I’m talking about?
Katagiri Roshi: No… Oh, “if they understand that,” you mean.
I don’t know how I can say… I don’t know the point of your question. What do you want to know? Something more than…
Questioner: Understanding. I don’t think that…
Katagiri Roshi: In this case, understanding means you have to understand the phenomenal world and also the spirit of the phenomenal world. That means the truth. Both exist mutually, inter-connectedly, [inter]penetrated. You should understand that. Not separately.
Questioner: It says, all things are equally in a state of suchness. So how can you talk about things conforming to it or not conforming to it?
Katagiri Roshi: Oh, where is [that]?
Questioner: On page 33, towards the bottom of that paragraph, it says, “for all things are equally in a state of suchness.”
Katagiri Roshi: “For all things are equally in a state of suchness.” Uh-huh.
Question: So, if all things are equally in a state of suchness, how can you talk about conforming to it or not conforming to it?
Katagiri Roshi: Because, all things are equally in the state of suchness, but on the other hand, all things we see or hear or know or understand are already not real things.
So that’s why we have to understand that all things […] operate to get with their own spirit, so-called the truth. Mutually, interpenetratedly. That is not a combination of the two, but it is kind of a working or operating or process between the phenomena and also truth. So, very naturally, we have to be there, and experience, and stay there, and act on, deal with.
Questioner: So, you’re saying that although all things are one, there is still a difference.
Katagiri Roshi: Yeah. There is still a difference.
So that’s what Dōgen Zenji also says, buddha-nature is dharma, buddha-dharma is amply present in everyone, but without practice, it doesn’t work. Without entering into, it doesn’t make sense. In Bendōwa, he [said something] like that.
So, we’re just like a diamond, anyway. We can be a very rough diamond. Apparently it is just a usual rock. But it is a diamond! For this, we have to polish and make a diamond. That is conformed practice for us. Is that what you mean?
Someone: Just like you were talking about the other day.
Questioner: Yeah, I know. I know. [Laughter.]