Thank you, David, for telling us your two-decade-old story of putting together this archive. And we can see from his story how complicated simple things can get. We have three ingredients. A wonderful person and teacher. The record of his teaching. And an institution.

[01:01]

And the fourth koan is Indra looks at the ground or we establish a sanctuary. And that's what, as I've pointed out, it's obvious what we're doing here. And David is creating a sanctuary, an archive of Sukhirushi and our lineage's teachings. But maybe in addition to the three ingredients, Suzuki Roshi, the record of his teaching and the institution, We should add a fourth ingredient.

[02:23]

The institution at the present time, at this historical moment. Yeah. And that brings up the whole question of governance. We can create a sanctuary to protect and continue the teaching. Continue. Yeah, but how do we take care of that institution? How do we govern that institution? Now the basic concept, the central tradition in Buddhism of governance, is a consensual process realized through a hierarchy based on seniority and position or role.

[03:50]

But this process of consensus realized through a hierarchy of seniority and position It's assumed to be a centralized process. Yeah, in a particular monastery or area, something like that. And that's hard enough for us.

[04:57]

Yeah. I mean, just a little example that came up for me just this moment. When I was living at Eheji. I don't know, there were 80 monks in the training hall, the Sodo, Zendo. Maybe a little less, but something like that. And Heiji is built of beautiful wood on a shiny polished wood by feet and hands on a mountainside. And there are these endless staircases, two-thirds as wide as this room. And there are these endless stairs that are almost twice as wide as this room.

[06:12]

They extend up and then through a flat and then extend up and then extend up and then it's forever, you know. I'll build a stair... No. And it looks like when all the monks are out on the way to service or zendo or something, it looks like a big black caterpillar climbing a hill. Well, you have to get, I mean, you come from some, everybody comes from different parts of the compound, and so you have to enter this line. And I would try to enter, but people would just push me out, sort of. And being a reasonably nice and half-well-trained Westerner, I waited till the end, and then I got in the end of the line.

[07:22]

I was taught not to push him lines. So this went on for some days. I would always get in the end. And then they called me aside for a little talking too. Why don't you get in line? I said, because you always push me out. No, no, you have to push back in. Japan is about pushing a little all the time. In the monastery, they don't say hello. They say gambate. They say, Kambate.

[08:45]

What does that mean, persist? So whenever you say hello to somebody, you say, persist. I had other plans, actually. Every time you say hello to someone, you say, persist. I thought I had other plans. But once you learn the right modality of persisting, which pushes enough to hold your place, then everything's fine. At first there's so many things like this, it feels like you're just completely out of place. The taxis coming in the cities can tell you're a foreigner not by the fact that you look like a Westerner, but by how you raise your arm. And they just go right by you, because you're too much damn trouble if you're a Westerner.

[10:08]

You don't know where you're going, etc. But after a while I realized I found just how to put your hand up. And they stuck, because they know you know where you're going. So a conceptual process of governance through a hierarchy is actually an extremely subtle process. It's really about how you push into a situation and how you let the situation push you. So for decades now I've been trying to see if I can teach this process, understand it well enough myself and teach it to our sanghas.

[11:12]

This is difficult enough. And mostly I failed. It must be partly because I don't understand it well enough myself. But What do you do in a lay sangha like ours, primarily, essentially a lay sangha? And I call it an adept, and I think we really are an adept lay sangha. How do we establish governance based on consensus through seniority and position? Yeah, when we're not centralized.

[12:28]

Really? I mean, it's hard enough to learn it when we're centralized, but how do we do it when we're decentralized? When we don't always reside in the same place, don't always practice in the same place. I guess I like difficult problems. Because I'm fully willing to try to make this work. And I know I have only 100 years in which to fail. And there will be more 100 years for somebody else to fail.

[13:31]

Dogen said practice is one continuous mistake. We're good at that. And we should be better at the continuous part, though. But we could be better at the continuous part. The mistake part we're not so bad at. But the continuous part is... So to try to effect this in our Sangha, It means we have to create some kind of institutional structure that's decentralized. Yeah, so we've created, it took two or three years ago, an outside financial advisory board.

[15:04]

And the... the responsibility of this board, is advisory, but since we're sort of decentralized, it's more than advisory. And somehow the process has to be always, in the end, the Sangha, the consensus of the Sangha has to make it happen there. So the decisions of the considerations of the outside financial advisory board

[16:05]

Like, should we, could we buy the place across the street, Wolfram's Place, if it becomes available? or another consideration of the outside financial advisory board, is, for example, how to support me if I become infirm. In firm? Yeah, get older, start drooling down my front, you know. In firm, not firm. Yeah, that's what I said. Yeah, it's funny in German.

[17:22]

Funny in German? Probably doesn't happen here. Anyway, and not only me, I mean, if this did happen, but also other teachers and long-term practitioners who've turned their life over to the Sangha. Yeah, these are things we have to think about. Now, the practice council decided to invite David and raise the money to invite David. Because it's more of a practice question of David joining us for some weeks or months. And probably the outside financial advisory board can help make the decision of whether we should buy David. our neighbor's property.

[18:40]

But it's going to be the practice council and the whole sangha to decide whether this really is possible to do at other levels than the financial level. And part of this decentralized, distributed institutional structure I've thought of actually creating maybe some sort of council of elders too. Who would include people from Crestone and Dharmasanga USA and Dharmasanga Europe.

[19:44]

And maybe just some random Buddhists who wander by. Anyway, we have to try things out to see if we can create a decentralized, consensual governing process. And from my point of view, we have to do it. Because the Sangha of the present and the future will be a lay Sangha. Mm-hmm. This is all to announce there will be a meeting this evening.

[20:53]

So if we're decentralized, it's very hard for us, like the outside financial advisory board, to meet. So this evening, some people won't come to Zazen, and a few people who are here from the board And so the rest of us will go to Zazen. And some of us are not included. And I'm not included. I'm not a member of the outside financial advisory board. So then some of us will have the problem of, why aren't we included? I don't know why, but that's your problem. Oh, yes, but we also, Nicole, people have been speaking to Nicole about, what is Crestone all about, really?

[22:14]

So there was some interest, I guess, in the people who've been to Crestone for practice periods, who were available, might meet this evening. Heck with the outside financial advisory board. We've got our own meeting. To talk about practice period at Crestone and et cetera. So If any of you would like to have such a meeting and those of you who've been to recent practice periods would like to be participants and answer questions and things.

[23:16]

And those of you should mention it to Nicole. And if there's anybody left to go to the Zazen, I will join them. And Friday evening, there's going to be, this is Thursday, Friday evening there will be practice council meeting. And Saturday we party. Well, no, I don't know. And Saturday we have Zazen to end the seminar. Okay. So now let's get back to the koan. Tsang's head is white.

[24:32]

Hai's head is black. Investigate another 30 years. That's the added sayings of the case. Investigate another 30 years. That's 10 years longer than David's been working on the archive. But how can such a simple thing, one guy's head's black, one guy's head's white, how can that be investigated for 30 years? Wie kann aber sowas Simples, wie dass der Kopf von dem einen weiß ist und der Kopf vom anderen schwarz, wie kann das 30 Jahre lang untersucht werden? What's under the surface of such a statement? Was liegt unter der Oberfläche einer solchen Aussage?

[25:34]

Or above the surface or over there, I don't know. Oder vielleicht über der Oberfläche oder da drüben oder was weiß ich. What does 30 years bring to such a statement? You know, recently I've seen three black and white dogs. And I saw them in different places, quite different places, and they seemed to be some kind of breed of black and white dogs. They're very similar. I don't know. Perhaps they're Boston Terriers. I don't know what they're doing here then. But each time I saw them, I was so startled because they're almost equally black and white spots. But every time I saw them, I was totally surprised, because they really have these black and white spots that look exactly the same.

[26:53]

owners holding the leash in different parts of Germany, were completely strangers to me. I couldn't resist. I said in English, English always startles people. You know. I said, is your dog black and white or white and black? And they said, black and white. Or, you know, whatever. And they didn't know they'd just met Matsu. Or, well, or at least Bozo, perhaps. Bozo's an American generic name for a clown. Bozo or Matsu, I don't know.

[28:01]

They met somebody. He was a television clown in the 50s, I think, in America. Bozo. Bozo means you're stupid or something. But is the dog black and white or white and black? What do we say? Am I a male or am I a female? Well, I've been mostly identified as a male since I was born. But I... must be partly female. And probably I'm more male than I'd like to be.

[29:03]

And women, I mean, they must be partly male too, otherwise they couldn't have male babies. Yeah, so... You know, the four propositions are it is or it isn't. And the third proposition is it both is and isn't. So here we have an example of the third proposition. Hier haben wir jetzt ein Beispiel dieser dritten Position. The dog is both white and black. Der Hund ist sowohl schwarz als auch weiß. I am both male and female. Ich bin sowohl männlich als auch weiblich. Yeah, I'm like that. Ja, so. Both. Es ist beides.

[30:07]

The stone, is the stone permanent or impermanent? Was mit dem Stein. Ist der beständig oder ist der unbeständig? It's both permanent and impermanent. Ja, da ist beides. Der ist beständig und der ist unbeständig. Am I functioning right now right hemispherically or left hemispherically? Funktioniere ich jetzt gerade rechtshirnig oder linkshirnig? Perhaps half-witted, but I'm functioning both hemispherically. Vielleicht nur... So, you know, you want to explore these things. This is the point. Before we can go beyond the four propositions and the hundred negations, We ought to know what we're going beyond. Or maybe we go beyond by really maturing the practice of the four propositions.

[31:08]

Do I want a milkshake? No, but I end up drinking a milkshake. So the conventional world of the two truths is pretty much both and. Things exist and don't exist. Things are relative. And the very word exists. Which in English is is. And be to be and is are forms of each other, grammatically. And being is... And sein ist... Seining?

[32:33]

Nein. Sein... Balming? Nein, sein ist isten. Isten. Sein ist isten. Ja. I'm going to start using it as a mantra. Sein ist isten. Sein ist isten. Istens sein. Sounds pretty good. I like it. Okay. Okay. So, being is is-ing. Ja, seines ist. But, so existence itself is is-ing. Also, die Existenz, die ist auch. I don't know what you mean, but anyway, it's good. Okay. So, What we call existence or what we call being is the non-duration of the present.

[33:35]

The endurance of the present doesn't exist. We just always examine that. So existence doesn't exist. Because what we mean by existence and being is the experience of duration. So even if we look at the word existence it means the duration of the present that's what being is and that doesn't exist. Oh, Nagarjuna, where are you now that we need you? Yeah. So we'll do the best we can. There are four propositions. Okay. Dark, black and white, or white and black? Ist der Hund schwarz-weiß oder ist der Weiß schwarz?

[34:52]

Yeah, so the hundred negations are the four propositions times four. Die hundert Verneinungen, das sind die vier Positionen mit vier Multiplizierungen. In other words, each of these propositions, if it exists or doesn't exist, etc., you can have a yes or no, affirmative or negative. This is Sufi Rishi makes this point. Many years ago. Saved by David. So that's sixteen, four times four. And this applies also to past, present and future. Did it exist in the past or not? Does it exist in the present or not? Will it exist in the future or not? Or neither exist, etc. Okay, so 3 times 16 is 48.

[35:53]

Oh, Nagarjuna. Okay. So now we got 48. And these are all actually, if you inventory your own experience, you are doing this. Is it true in the past? Was it true in the future? What should I do now? Maybe, et cetera. That's all these first 48 negations. First 48 alternatives. Yeah, in past, present, and future. Okay, now, of course, there's a more subtle aspect. I mean one and two are quite practical.

[37:06]

Is there a restaurant in walking distance? In Crestone there either is or isn't. And since I just found out last night that the harvest failed This is terrible. It's our only good restaurant. Oh, really? It's gone? Gone. And the building's for sale. Anybody got 450 grand? Anyway. It was a fairly good restaurant. Now, let's forget about the one that also is there. The nearest restaurant is about 100 kilometers.

[38:09]

That's farther than walking distance, at least for me. I mean, not Evelyn probably, but... or bicycle distance. Okay. So there either is a restaurant near or there isn't. So that's the first two. However, the very idea of restaurant depends on there being restaurants. Okay, so the concept of restaurant depends on there being such a thing as a restaurant. Also hängt das Konzept eines Restaurants davon ab, dass es überhaupt Restaurants gibt. So in the larger sense, restaurants exist. So is there a restaurant in walking distance? Well, no, practically, but restaurants exist.

[39:12]

Also nochmal die Frage, gibt es ein Restaurant in der Nähe? Nein, praktisch gesehen nicht, aber Restaurants gibt es. Now this may seem like threading hairs. Um... Threading? A needle? Thread a needle? That's not the usual cliché, but I thought I'd change it. But actually, if you examine your experience, it's in the realm of does this exist or does it not exist? And you're always making decisions based on an assumed existence of something you already know, of course. But as you probably know, I should stop in a few minutes, or should have stopped already. But let's speak about the 96. Okay, so you've got, we've got 48 now.

[40:25]

And then we have things as they are and things as they could be. Aha. Oh yeah, I should have thought of that. So that's two more alternatives. And two times 48 is 96. And now we have the 96 negations, which are things as they are and things as they could be. Johanneshoff as it is and Johanneshoff as it could be. Yeah, the non-perdurance of the present and the perdurance of the present.

[41:31]

Or many aspects of your practice. Much of our practice is in the frame of how it could be, which we intend, We intend our practice to be a certain way. But we accept the resolution of how it is. There's a pun there because to resolve, to have a resolution is to have an intention. You don't need to explain that. But the intention ends up to be resolved in a certain way, which is just the way it is, not what you intended. No, sorry, say that again, please.

[42:41]

No. I got lost. Let's just leave it lost. It's fun to be lost. So practice is always in the midst of the way it could be and the way it is. And to develop that dynamic is at the center of practice. Each person you meet is a Buddha. Okay. This isn't philosophy. This is with each person you meet, not in general, but each person you meet, you feel somehow this person is also a Buddha. Sometimes you have to look pretty hard. Sushri Rishi once said, we are all failed Buddhas. But if with each person you meet you have the feeling this person is also a Buddha, there's some subtleness in how you find yourself in the world.

[43:51]

But if with each person you meet you have the feeling this person is also a Buddha, then... Findest du auch eine Subtilität, eine Feinheit darin, wie du in der Welt bist? Yeah. Why do we want to go beyond the 100 negations? This is great. Warum sollten wir über die 100 von einem hinausgehen wollen? Das ist doch schon großartig. Okay. See you tomorrow. Bis morgen.

[44:33]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_73.27