The Awakening of Faith – Talk 7
May 4, 1984 Dharma Talk by Dainin Katagiri Roshi
Previous | Next | List | Series: Awakening of Faith
Transcript
This transcript is in draft stage.
0:00
Katagiri Roshi: Page [34], from “Next, Suchness has two aspects…”
Next, Suchness has two aspects if predicated in words. One is that it is truly empty, for [this aspect] can, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly nonempty, for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent qualities.
1. Truly Empty
[Suchness is empty] because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence, it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things, and it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind.
It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with marks nor without marks; neither not with marks nor not without marks; nor is it both with and without marks simultaneously; it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously.
In short, since all unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated [from Suchness]; hence, the definition “empty”; but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.
2. Truly Nonempty
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, that is, devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called “nonempty”. And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.
(From The Awakening of Faith, translated by Yoshito S. Hakeda, 1967.)
In terms of the reality of all things, all beings, the truth independent from words is described as inexplicable and unthinkable in the foregoing [portions], in order to make the truth itself fresh in one’s mind; that is the portion we learned so far. This portion we have [just] read goes into the truth in words; in the previous portions, the truth independent from words.
Finally, the truth is described in the simplest word, so-called truth, or one-mind. And through this word, one mind or the truth, we have to know the spirit of the word, in other words, beyond the word. We have to go beyond the word the truth or one mind. That is the purpose of using the words in order to let you know what is the real truth.
So finally, we cannot help [but] to reach the simplest word in order to know the real truth. That is called the truth or one mind, et cetera. But in this portion, we try to describe the truth depending on the words.
Naturally, it goes without saying that explanation of the truth in words is very provisional. Because the truth itself is not that which should be uttered in words, because in the previous portion, the truth is beyond words.
The first paragraph says that, “Suchness has two aspects if indicated in words. One is that it is truly empty, …” – śūnya in Sanskrit; truly empty – “for this aspect can, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly non-empty (a-śūnya), for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent quality. ”
So, two kinds of the truth in words; one is truly empty. But that empty doesn’t negate [or] deny the truth itself, but negates deluded mind [with] which we misunderstand the truth, or our object. That deluded mind must be negated because the truth is completely never contaminated by this deluded mind.
And also the truly non-empty: this paragraph says the truth itself has excellent, boundless quality – supporting, maintaining – characterized by maintaining the truth itself and simultaneously maintaining all sentient beings. This is so-called dharma, we say. In Sanskrit, dharma means to have [the] peculiarity to maintain itself. That is the meaning of dharma.
So [there are] two kinds of truth we have to know. Otherwise, there is no chance to know what the truth is.
In the Madhyamaka, [in] Chapter 24 and Number 8, 9, 10, Nāgārjuna [says],
The teaching by the buddhas of the dharma [has recourse to] two truths: the [world-ensconced] truth, and the truth which is the highest sense. Those who do not know the distribution of the two kinds of the truth do not know the profound point and the teaching of the buddhas. The highest sense of the truth is not taught apart from practical behavior. And without having understood the highest sense, one cannot understand nirvana.
(From Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (“Root Verses on the Middle Way”) by Nāgārjuna. The translation may be from Emptiness: A Study in Religious Meaning by Frederick J. Streng.)
So without understanding these two kinds [there is no chance to know what the truth is]. [The first is] the highest sense of the truth, that is the truth completely independent from the words. That is the highest sense of the truth. And the other truth is the truth manifested in the human world. That is, what would you say, the secular aspect of the truth. The other one is the ultimate aspect of the truth. Without understanding these two kinds of the truth, it is impossible to approach, to reach the nirvana, which means to have perfect freedom.
15:30
So next, Number One. If so, what is the true empty? So one by one, [this] describes what the true empty is.
Suchness is empty because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence, it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things, and it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind.
The first sentence, “Suchness is empty because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled state of existence, …”
So from this point, truly empty indicates the wholeness of subject and object.
This first paragraph mentions the subjective objective views on the human world, human life. Subjective, and subject and object; the subjective and objective views on the human world. And this paragraph mentions that truly empty is the wholeness of subject and object. Wholeness: not separated. That is the truly empty; so-called the truth in words.
So that’s why here it says, “from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled state of existence.”
So what is a defiled state of existence? Next it says, “it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things.” All marks of individual distinction of things. This is objective view. And next it says, “it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind.” This is subjective view.
Without subject, it is impossible for object to exist. Without object, subject doesn’t exist. So object and subject [are] interrelated. But unfortunately subject acts on its object, simultaneously misunderstands its object. So that’s why that is deluded mind. It is impossible for us to understand our object as it really is. Because later this says, we always distinguish subject and object, constantly from moment to moment. So it’s very hard to keep away from that. And also, the problem is that our cognition doesn’t realize that the human mind misunderstands object. That’s mentioned later.
That’s why we misunderstand the object, because the subject is already deluded mind. So that’s why the truth in words, the real truth is completely free from this misunderstanding – the subjective misview, misunderstanding, or objective misunderstanding. Completely free from.
So that’s why here it says, “From the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence.” So whatever you see, you understand – even if you say “I understand perfectly,” this is already deluded. Even if you say “I get enlightenment,” it is deluded. Or even if you say “I understand the truth as it is exactly,” no matter how long you practice, it is deluded. This is very important. And then that [statement] lets you know what the real truth is.
If you don’t know, you become always a troublemaker. Look at the human world: always fighting, because they believe […] always their understanding, their experience, is truth, their religion is truth. By this strong belief and strong experience, we fight each other.
That’s why this negative way and the truly empty is kind of not a positive way of understanding, but it is very important, because through this negative aspect of expression of the truth we can know what the truth is. In order to know real truth, we have to reflect upon ourselves like this, constantly.
So whatever you say, right or wrong, neutral, or perfect understanding, that is deluded already. Deluded means it is individual. The truth you have understood perfectly becomes individual experience of the truth. At that time, that truth is not universal. So very naturally, you really attach to it. And then the problem is, you cannot have a relation, you cannot communicate with the people who have never experienced the truth. So that is discrimination. So very naturally a sense of comparison, a sense of conflict and stress comes up.
So that’s why the first paragraph says, “from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled state of existence,” because, “it is free from all marks of individual distinct [forms] of things.” Whatever you understand as your object, it is not right; that is your understanding. “And it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind.” That’s why your understanding is yours, but you have to know something, so-called spirit of your own understanding. In other words, behind your understanding, or go beyond your individual understanding. There is something more. It’s huge, [one].
So that’s why here it says, “it has nothing to do with thoughts.”
26:25
If so, let’s [look at] “all marks of individual distinction of things” in detail. That will be in the next [sentence]:
It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with marks nor without marks; neither not with marks nor not without marks; nor is it both with and without marks simultaneously; it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously.
So from this point, all marks of individual distinction of things are that the truth is perceived in the state of being, in the state of no-being – in other words with marks or without marks, that means being or no-being. Being means what is, no-being means what is not.
We always have a common type of evaluation through being or no-being, not being or not no-being – like this. […] Buddhism follows this pattern, in order to know how your consciousness is always working, […] what kind of pattern your consciousness follows if you see your object. So very naturally, […] our consciousness follows a certain pattern that is the state of […] a being or no-being, [which means] what is or what is not. Next, not being, [which means] not what is, or not no-being means not what is not. Do you understand? If you see the microphone, you say “microphone is here.” Next, “microphone is not here.” Next says, “microphone is not being.” “Microphone is not not being.” Like this. So there is a kind of pattern. So finally it says, “microphone is both.” Being, here it is, or not being – both.
After your death, what is death? Where are you heading for, after death? Does the other world exist? Yes, or not. Next, “no yes,” and “no no.” And next you say, “Both. Yes and no.” This is [the] pattern, always. Whatever you think, whatever you discuss about your object or about your subject, very naturally cognition follows this kind of pattern. That is called all marks of individual distinction of things.
But actually it is very difficult to understand your object or subject, life and death, good and bad, following this pattern because everything is changing. It is very difficult to understand.
For instance, there is a sentence: “This is gone.” At that time, this implicates something to be in this sentence. So from this point, what does it mean, “this is gone”? But this, in this sentence, implicates something to be. But in the predicate it says “is gone.” So what do we mean, “is gone”? Because this is already something to be, and [then] say, “this is gone.” It is impossible to say so, to say about something to be already gone. You cannot say so, you cannot explain, because it is already gone. But you say, “this is gone.”
Or another sentence, “John is gone.” Well, it means that John cannot be found here, but to expect that he could be found somewhere, or that John who was here is gone now. [He chuckles.] Like this. So you always use sentences like this, “John is gone.” But it’s really impossible to say [something] about John who is gone. If you use John, already John is a person who was here, you already expect this situation. And then next it says, he is gone. […] So from this point, as long as this or John is premised, it is impossible for you to [say] entirely [non]. No. You cannot explain entirely [non].
For instance, […] it is impossible for us to mention real death, because you go. You cannot. Because if you say, “you are gone,” you are completely gone. That is your business, not my business! [He laughs.] Not something you should know from your business. No! [He laughs.] You are gone: that reality is something you should know, you should [be with] it. But you are already gone. So who knows?
If you die… We say, “Katagiri died.” And everyone understands, “Oh yes, Katagiri died.” [He chuckles.] That is the concept of death you understand. You understand the concept of death; you never know real death, Katagiri’s real death. Because “Katagiri died” is my business, not your business. Don’t you think so?
For instance, “I attain enlightenment.” It is my business, not your business! You know? I say, “I attain enlightenment,” then you say, “Wow, wonderful, Katagiri.” But […] you really bow to who, what? The concept of enlightenment. [He laughs.] So, real enlightenment is… no one knows. Okay?
So it’s very difficult to understand something according to the certain pattern, so-called it is being or it is not being, et cetera. It is very difficult; everything is changing.
And also, everything exists according to teaching of interconnected, interdependent co-origination. Okay? So it’s very difficult to say about the death itself, real death; no. It’s very difficult to say.
And also, here is an interesting sentence, for instance: “There is no round triangle.” [He laughs.] No one believes in the round triangle. But even in this sentence, something to be is foreseen. It is impossible for you to state entirely non-existence, […] something non-, completely non-. You cannot say so. If you say, “there is no round triangle,” maybe you expect that, maybe somewhere… [he laughs,] you expect somewhere [a] round triangle could be, might be. Because already […] you have an image of something. But an image is already a being, alright? Even though you [only think it], if you can think something, it’s already being. You cannot ignore this. You have to think [of] your life with this image too – whatever you think.
Anyway, if you use one word, around the word many beings exist. Imagination, visualization; connected with your memory, connected with your heredity, connected with your past life, present life, future life. And then, something happens around one word. That’s why only a single word doesn’t exist alone; it’s connected with all beings. That’s why you cannot judge [or] evaluate your object, or subject, or anything through a single pattern, so-called the sentence you have used.
So through the sentence it’s very difficult to understand something real. That’s why Buddhism [says] truth is beyond the words. The truth of death is beyond the word, [or whatever it is].
It is because everything exists according to the principle of interdependent co-origination.
In the sutra, it says people in the secular world have the standard of the excessive two-sided idea, being or no being. If you see closely [the] origination of existence as it really is according to right wisdom, no being or what is not doesn’t exist in this world. Nor a being, certain pattern of cognition, so-called what is, exists if you see closely extinction of existence with the right wisdom. Because everything is change. If you see real picture of extinction – appearance, disappearance – if you really understand disappearance, you cannot judge all sentient beings according to a certain pattern, so-called what is, or being.
So completely you have to know something beyond words, something beyond the object you have seen. This is the real picture of the microphone’s existence, your […] subjective existence.
So for instance, let’s [look at] the true picture of the self. For [myself], Katagiri, Katagiri was born in 1928, and then he has been living until now. So at that time the self named Katagiri doesn’t change? It changes.
[Tape break.]
… From moment to moment, he is growing. From this point his personality, his knowledge, everything is growing. So every day, he is different. So there is no particular one type of Katagiri. No. He’s always changing. [There is] no “avocado seed” so-called Katagiri. No; always changing.
But on the other hand, if you see Katagiri today, you can imagine for what Katagiri was yesterday and what he will be. So from this point, through yesterday to the present to the future, there is one type of Katagiri always there. In other words, the one ground of the Katagiri, the same and one type of Katagiri itself. And then you can understand the development, change of Katagiri’s personality.
So […] what is the true picture of the self? The true picture of the self is sometimes operating in the state of continuation in discontinuation. Okay? [He chuckles.] [We may say that.] Or, discontinuation in continuation, like this. But it cannot be understood by the idea of continuation and discontinuation, but by being free from attachment to these ideas. So the real picture of the self is not fitting into this category, so-called continuation in discontinuation or discontinuation in continuation, no. Because the real reality of the self, which is always growing and changing, day by day, from moment to moment, is… nothing to grasp. It’s dynamic. So if you say the self is operating in the state of continuation of discontinuation, this is already a certain pattern, so-called both with marks nor without marks. Something like this.
So it’s a kind of wonderful discrimination, wonderful function of your mind. If you know the real picture of the self which is going in discontinuation in continuation, continuation in discontinuation, that understanding is pretty good. But still, that is not real understanding. It’s still deluded. So you have to know something more than this. Real life, the truth of the self, truth of your object, is constantly going beyond this category [or] any categories.
So next, the same applies to the next [part]:
… it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously.
This is, for instance, nirvana. Or maybe you can ask, “Is the truth one with phenomena?” In other words, truth and phenomena are the same things, or they are different, or maybe they are both. If you try to know the real relation between the truth and phenomena, we try to follow a certain pattern. And then it says, the truth and phenomena are one, the same. So that is one way to understand the relation between truth and phenomena. Next, someone says, “no, they are not one, they are different.” This is another pattern. And finally someone says, “well, they are kind of a combination, so both.” This is another pattern too. But you never understand what is the relation is between the truth and phenomena. No.
So real relation between the truth and phenomena is completely beyond this pattern or categories. But unfortunately, or fortunately, we have to follow these kind of patterns. But if you follow these kind of patterns, you attach to [them]. That is a problem. That’s why constantly we have to say “your pattern is fine, but don’t attach to your understanding.” Because your understanding is already followed according to certain patterns. So you never understand anything as it is through any patterns of thinking or understanding.
So that is this sentence.
50:44
So finally, the second paragraph from the bottom at page 35:
In short, since all unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated from Suchness; hence, the definition “empty”; but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.
“In short, since all enlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment”: so we cannot understand the subject and the object; we cannot understand the object because subject has already deluded mind. Deluded mind means a state that mind doesn’t reach the truth itself. Or, the deluded mind means that cognition as discrimination doesn’t realize how deluded it is. No; that is characteristic of cognition. If you are involved in the cognition, you’re just going.
For example, just like a dream. A dreamer doesn’t realize his dream while dreaming. No. Even though in the dream you say, “oh, it is a dream,” still you enjoy very much. [He chuckles.] Still your body and mind is completely soaked in the stream of dreaming; that’s it. And then […] you say, “Oh, it is a dream.” But even that thinking is also in the stream of dreaming. So wherever you think, all things are in the stream of dreaming.
So when you are in the stream of the dream, the dreamer doesn’t know, doesn’t know his dream. That is called deluded mind.
That’s why in the Diamond Sutra, bodhisattva always in a certain situation but he never is blind. He is always clear. He is in the darkness, but his light is not dark. His light, his mind, his body is always not in the darkness. That’s always what the Diamond Sutra says. So that means bodhisattvas are always in the dream but they are always free from the dream.
So if you have a certain standard of your view on the human world, human life – it is fine – but it is deluded. But it’s very difficult to realize, because you are dreaming.
So, that is deluded mind. That’s why here it says, “Unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment.” Constantly you do. Your understanding, so-called “I am dreaming”, [is] in the stream of dreaming. It’s pretty good! It’s better than nothing, anyway. Still there is a chance: right in the middle of dream, still you can have a chance to know your dream.
That realization is pretty good for us. So that’s why this book and Buddhism always says, you should know your cognition. Constantly your mind is working from moment to moment. You should know that fact, reality. And then that realization takes you to a little bit freedom from cognition on the basis of a certain pattern or category. So you can be free from.
So sometimes realization takes you to the limit of your cognition, the limit of understanding subject and understanding object. You come to a dead end. That is realization. And then simultaneously, this door is open. The limit is not the [static] or fixed partion in front of you. That partition is very soft, just like a curtain. The moment when you touch it, it opens, it disappears. And then, [a] huge expanse, vast expanse of existence is right in front of you.
That is characteristic of realization. So-called “spiritual transformation at 360 degrees,” anyway. [He chuckles.] Well, sometimes 180. [He laughs.]
So that’s why we have to say always empty. This is the definition of emptiness. Okay? Empty.
“… but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.” So if you realize this deluded mind, how it is going, you can be free from.
58:37
So next, let’s [look at] number two, “Truly Nonempty.”
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, i.e., devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called “nonempty.” And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.
Non-empty, it mentions before, it is implication of excellent, boundless quality which the truth itself possesses. The truth is of real entity and has boundless nature of its virtuous quality. This is the meaning of non-empty.
So [in this book] non-empty means not to deny, not to destroy the truth itself, the essence of the truth, but we should deny the deluded mind. But in the Buddhist teaching of Prajñāpāramitā, it doesn’t say so. [He chuckles.] In Prajñāpāramitā, we say, “Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.” That means object itself is emptiness. Not “deluded,” not “image of your understanding is empty.” No. “Form itself is empty.” Your object itself is empty. Subject itself is empty. That’s why next, “emptiness is form,” this sentence comes into existence.
If empty implies to negate a deluded mind, you cannot say “empty is form”. But if “form is empty, simultaneously empty is form,” that means completely […] object itself is empty. So a little different.
But in the Prajñāpāramitā Sutra, it doesn’t mention why the object and subject itself is empty, how emptiness is related with object itself. Well, what part of the object is emptiness? It doesn’t [say]. Just Prajñāpāramitā brings up that teaching, that just emptiness. So it’s very difficult to understand it.
But in this book, [it’s a little different]. Because we want to know, what part of the object is emptiness? Is […] the whole thing empty? How about subject? How about subject who is looking at the object? Is it also emptiness? This book, that is Buddhist psychology, is always analyzing, synthesizing like this. So a little bit different. Very naturally it becomes logical, very rational.
So in this book, that’s why truth itself is never denied, but deluded mind is negated. Because later, it says tathagatagarbha means buddha-nature is present in you. Whoever you are, tathagatagarbha is present in you always. That is a teaching of the idea of tathagatagarbha. Garbha means “womb,” literally.
1:03:30
So,
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, …
In this case, “essence of all things is empty” means not clear understanding the truth itself. That’s why next it says
… that is, devoid of illusion, …
This illusion must be empty, but the truth is the truth as a whole. Anyway, constantly truth.
But still there is a little different understanding about the view on truth. In this book… well, maybe you won’t understand, but maybe you should listen to it, okay? [He chuckles.] In this book, truth is understood in two ways. One, truth is completely truth as a whole which exists constantly, eternally. On the other hand, truth is contaminated by human ignorance. That means truth is operating in the human world. The moment when the truth operates in the human world, it is contaminated by deluded mind. So it appears as deluded mind, because it doesn’t cling to its own being. Because truth itself doesn’t have its own particular strong ideas, et cetera, so truth doesn’t have its own substance.
So that’s why truth is real truth which is eternal, but simultaneously truth doesn’t have its own substance, so it appears any place, in all directions, and then in the human phenomenal world and not-phenomenal world. So when it appears in the phenomenal world, it is contaminated. It is connected with deluded mind; that is called contaminated, defiled.
But in the Buddhist psychology, so-called the “merely mind only,” that is what we call Yuishiki Buddhist psychology. In this teaching, I think the truth is always the truth, immutably; immutably and permanently. It is called dharma of the mui (Transcriber’s Note: muihō 無為法, derived from Sanskrit asaṃskṛta-dharma); “mui” means the unconditioned dharma. So truth is completely truth; nothing to do with the phenomenal world.
So that is very idealistical, very idealistic. That is Buddhist psychology; Abhidharmakosha. [He chuckles.] Abhidharmakosha is very clear, one by one. But that’s why truth is completely truth, absolute, which exists eternally. But here, [it’s] a little bit different. Truth is eternal, but simultaneously truth is related closely with the phenomenal world. That’s why when it appears in the phenomenal world, it is something different.
So “since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, that is, devoid of illusion, …”
… the true mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, …
So truth is immutable, and at the same time conditional. That’s why I said truth is eternal but simultaneously it appears in the phenomenal world. It means, according to the phenomenal world, [it operates]. That is conditional. So the truth is characterized by eternity and [it is] conditioned, [so] change. That is the idea of the truth in this book.
So in other words, the truth is eternal and immutable, on the other hand, truth is allowed to change in accordance to circumstances and […] conditions. That is so-called the truth in words. Truth appears in the human world.
And next it says,
… pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called “nonempty”.
So the truth itself has the boundless virtuous quality of purity or clearness. This is the truth itself. So truth itself, complete purity and clearness, complete by itself. It is not something we try to understand, or we try to escape, or we try to be with. It is not something you should produce. It is already something completed beyond your speculation. So that is “self-sufficient.” That is a dharma, so-called dharma, we say.
So dharma is completely something maintaining itself, constantly. So before the world was born in this world, or before the Buddha, even regardless of whether the Buddha was born in this world, it’s going. Or a nuclear weapon destroys the whole world, but still there is something. This is called the truth.
So it’s very difficult to understand in words, that’s why we say emptiness [by Nāgārjuna]. But emptiness is not any real emptiness, that’s why quality of the emptiness or contents of emptiness is called interdependent co-origination. This is the structure of emptiness, how emptiness operates in the human world. That is in the teaching in the Madhyamaka.
[The timekeeper indicates that there are ten more minutes.]
Okay. Ten minutes more. Let me finish, okay? [He chuckles.]
That is why it is called non-empty.
1:12:52
And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, …
So truth doesn’t have any trace, any marks. No trace of any marks particularly, so-called it is no color, no smell: even though you say “no smell”, “no color”, it is already a certain trace of certain ideas. Truth doesn’t have any trace of particular marks.
So something more than marks: no marks. Or both, marks or no marks. That is called “no trace of [marks]”.
So the truth is one or a partless one which is eternal. So the truth itself is of a single mark, so-called one, we say. It’s very difficult to say in words, that’s why [we finally say] one mind, or partless one. If you say one, you already understand the one opposed to two, okay? [He chuckles.] So if that one is understanding the truth through the one, you already leave the trace of the word, so-called one. So it’s not real one. That’s why partless one: it is completely one, absolute one.
Question: What did you say?
Katagiri Roshi: Partless. P-A-R-T-L-E-S-S. Partless.
Same person: Oh, I see. Okay. [They laugh.]
Katagiri Roshi: Okay?
So, single [mark] or one mind means when something in common can be found among more than two kinds of color, it is what is called color as I use. If only one color, you cannot have an idea of colors. Only if there are colors more than two, and then you can find something in common, then you can have an idea of colors. But only one color, you cannot have any idea of color, because there is only one in this world.
Or if there is only a single finger, so called “here is one finger.” Just like Gutei Zen Master always showed one finger: when monks asked what the buddha-nature is, he always showed [one finger]. Whatever kind of answer comes, he always shows the one finger. It means [the same as] “I alone am the honored one.” Okay? It’s one.
So if there is only a single finger like this, nothing else around this one finger – how can this one finger touch? How can we know this one finger? Nothing. If you know even slightly “here it is,” that is already [that] objectively you can see this one. But [if there is] in this world only one thing: how can you know? You cannot have even the idea of one. No. The idea of the perfect one cannot be explained. So, the perfect one is no form. The perfect single form is no form. Because you cannot say.
So that’s why if you concentrate on the breath as it is exactly, there is no form, no trace. That is called shikan; shikantaza. You don’t believe it, but it is really true. That’s why we have to practice, anyway. That’s why [we say] “sit down without thinking,” but you try to think, [he chuckles,] in order to [avoid] wasting time. But it’s not wasted.
1:18:22
So, next [it says],
… as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts, …
[…] The cognition of the truth is not the dichotomy of the subject and object, but unity of subject and object. Cognizing subject and object as a whole. This is the sphere – sphere means object – that transcends thoughts.
So, the cognition of the truth must be something, that means object. If you want to say object, the cognition of the truth is kind of an object which should transcend your thoughts. Because your thought is already deluded. Because your thought is discrimination, which is characterized by separation between the subject and object, clearly. That is your thoughts: discrimination; it is called deluded. You never know the truth itself.
That’s why cognition of the truth is, if you want to say sphere or object, if you want to know the truth as an object, maybe you say the cognition of the truth is a sphere which transcends, [is] free from your thoughts. That is cognition of the truth.
In other words, cognition itself. [He laughs.] Strictly speaking, cognition itself – not by your cognition then I realize the truth itself. No. Cognition itself. Because to swim itself is temporally called swim. Or, if you are there, right in the middle of [the] action, the stream of the swimming, you are call swimmer, temporarily. But that idea comes from dichotomies. If you want to know real swim itself, you must be there. Just be there. That is cognition of the truth, which appears as action, so-called swim.
So if you swim with total function, you don’t know what the swim is. That is called shikan. That is called “free from thought,” or “transcend thoughts.” That’s why if you want to be free from thoughts, you always practice, and you must be always in the process of practice, action – with clear mind, not [blindly]. Because action is very dangerous, because immediately action goes this way or that way, because action creates result, very naturally. So you have to take care of action as clear as it is.
So with your clear mind, you have to do it. That is practice in precision. Dōgen Zenji [talks about] precision, practice in precision. When you do gassho, your whole body and mind must do gassho – not only two hands. When you play the piano, you have to play the piano with the whole body and mind. That is called shikan your actions. At that time your mind, your body, operates clearly. At that time it is called free from thoughts.
It doesn’t mean to try to see something, but to see it as it really is. That means when you swim, you have to swim as you really are. That’s it. Not trying to know swim, or not trying to swim; you just swim. You just swim there.
So that swim is continuation of the human action in smooth succession. Very smooth succession. So very naturally you realize very silent proof. If you are just walking in smooth succession, very naturally silent proof is given to you. You don’t know, but [only you] know. But other people don’t know. That is spiritual security.
Anyway, this is called the cognition of the truth, understanding of the truth.
So understanding of the truth is what? It’s very practical. Every day it’s clear. When, where? When you act. When you live. But your mind must be clear. That’s why it’s a little difficult. Your thoughts should be [operate]. [He laughs.] Never-the-less, you must be free from thoughts. Okay?
So you have to know what the swim is, you should learn what the swim is. But then you must be free from thoughts. That means jump into the ocean. Swim. And then at that time, there is no space to try to know what swim is. You just swim. Just [the] swim is going in smooth succession.
[Tape break.]
1:26:15
The last [part of the] sentence says,
… and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.
That’s why finally the cognition of the truth can be actualized by wisdom of enlightenment. If you realize, what the knowing of the truth is. Knowing the truth, cognition of the truth, is very quiet, very active practice.
And it’s yours. It’s not others’ stories; it’s yours. Others are not you. So I have to do. If I want to know the truth, I have to do. I have to know. I have to be there. It’s not others’ stories. It’s not a matter of discussions.
So that’s why it says here “is in harmony with enlightenment alone.” That is wisdom of enlightenment. If you attain enlightenment, that means if you see the human world in a broad scale, perspective, it is called enlightenment. Or practically, you can have something. That is enlightenment. Wisdom comes from enlightenment. Enlightenment itself is wisdom. When the enlightenment operates in your life, it is called wisdom.
So if you understand the real meaning of swim, that is enlightenment. And then, jump into the ocean. At that time, the wisdom of enlightenment takes care of you, takes care of your swimming, very naturally.
So what is the wisdom of enlightenment? It’s a very quiet practice. So-called shikan, we say shikan, simply speaking.
Or we say samadhi. From this point, your body and even the actions, so-called swimming, are all right in the middle of samadhi. Very quiet, showing always the truth, understanding of the truth – of the ocean, your body, and even the action of the swimming. All are samadhi. That samadhi is called right acceptance. So, [the] whole thing is going.
According to the Avatamsaka Sutra, not only human beings, all sentient beings are right in the middle of samadhi. Huge samadhis. So we are swimming in the ocean of the samadhi.
So that is “is in harmony with enlightenment alone.”
So through this, two kinds of truth, we have to know real truth. That real truth is in the last [paragraph].