It looks like 3.30 will be a better time for me next. For the most part, I don't want to emphasize Zazen during the prologue day. I'm more interested in just what's happening without doing Zazen. Although I can certainly say that early Zazen is a Rex, we can understand it as waking up within physiological sleep. And I say that, you know, I don't know if it's necessarily helpful for one doing Zazen.

[01:09]

But I say it because I'm emphasizing that Zazen, why it transforms us. And it is a change in our life. But it also is a rearrangement to re-emphasize on the ways we already are when we include sleeping. So I do think that you can say that it is. closely related to not dreaming deeply.

[02:21]

Now, does anybody want to say anything in relationship to what I'm speaking this morning? Can you hear me back? No. you described pretty beautifully this morning, this experience of Parshos, this experience of serendipity, year of time. And this metaphor, this picture, this reality, this reality, this time particle,

[03:33]

And this metaphor or maybe experience and reality of time particles? So also space as time particles? Could it be that we are able to understand what other people meant or other people wrote because of these time particles? We're able to understand whatever people wrote or meant because of time particles? Yeah. Okay. I have a question about that. Manakaya is a concept or an idea. Could it be that

[04:35]

And the Nimanakaya is an experience or a concept, and could it be that these time particles could be a way of the Nimanakaya studying? So what do you, I mean, when I'm reading something, I'm understanding Because of the words. And I'm understanding it because I can feel presence of the writer Dogen or somebody within the words. But what does this have to do with time? Die Gegenwart, die Worte, sind vielleicht auch so eine Art Zeitpartikel.

[06:10]

So the presence of the words might be some kind of time parties. Okay, why not? What is a time party? Let's stick with what she said first. It's something I said, and she's bringing it up. And Regina speaks about it again. Ich spreche deshalb darüber, weil mich das interessiert und ich es auch irgendwie wieder gar nicht verstehe. I'm talking about time particles because I'm interested in one thing, because I'm interested in the other thing. I completely don't understand. Natürlich, es gibt diese Theorie von Welle und Teilchen. Naturally, there is this theory of wave and .

[07:15]

Can I leave it open this way? Yeah, let's leave it open this way. But I can ask myself, why did I say time particles? Well, I do want to speak in the next seminar with the psychologists, whoever comes. I want to speak about Successional and gestational time. And I'm trying to resist. Sorry, I didn't understand the last word. Gestational. Well, gestation means to carry it. Yes. But gestate is a word bigger than pregnancy.

[08:26]

Okay. It just means to carry. Okay. So it then was adapted to a woman carrying and carrying a child. Okay. I'm sorry. So I don't know how you say it. I try to figure out. It's supposed to be auspulted in the beginning. Yes, okay. There's gesture, there's suggest. Dogen uses the word ripening time. Now we were trying to get away from clock time. So time is a medium that we are... like water you're swimming in.

[09:48]

But I try to not speak about it in the seminar. Because it takes more days than we have in the seminar. But the context in which I mentioned it, I said I come here once a year. But if there's 10, 20 of you, then I come here. 20 times a year. But there are moments or particles of time. I'm not trying to relate it to physics or something. And those moments of time also are We have various moments of time, including time when you

[11:06]

We had a communication when I did Johannesburg. There's a number of sheep up there. There's a number of sheep up there. Think of them as four or five sheep that should like to hang out together. But it's also useful to think of them as one animal in four or five bodies. And I would say that We live a lot of the time with deer in Creston.

[12:08]

And it's pretty clear to me the group of deer, 10 and 15, usually travel. And it is quite clear that a group of wild animals that are together in a group of 10 to 12 deer and deer are really 10 or 12 bodies of an animal. And my feeling is we humans are that different. We're quite a number of bodies here, but somehow we're also one animal. And we suppress it. Our culture suppresses it.

[13:09]

You know, competitive and all that stuff, which is a form of suppression. This other aspect of beingness, So to see, not suppressed by comparison or shared We have the practice, the recipe of the four Brahma Bhihas. But again, I'm resisting speaking about that today.

[14:11]

Could I speak about that tomorrow? And that's only because if I launch into it, it takes over. In the prologue day, I'm trying to keep things broken up and confusing. Yes, Christine. I like this timeline. Because I'm interested in our experience, if we can experience it differently. I like these time-particles because I'm interested in... Oh, I'm in trouble.

[15:29]

I thought of an escape from time-particles. So Christine said, I'm interested in time-particles because I'm interested in experiencing things differently. So what I like about it is that only if somebody expresses or expresses this idea of time partners, it enables other people to, and it enables myself to recognize I know this experience, I have this experience, and I'm quite sure that other people in this room share this experience as well. Okay. Maybe we could talk about that. So what I was interested in is the body.

[16:30]

And other ways to understand the body. And you have been emphasizing since decades our views and perspectives for our experiences. And the way how we experience. And recently I got something to read which was dealing with the body. And I'm quite sure that you also know that. It's Yushin Shenzhen. Gendlin. Yes, Gendlin.

[17:40]

He's Austrian. Oh, so you pronounce it Gendlin here? No. Gendlin we call it in America. And what it says is the body is the situation. So the body is not the mutual exchange or the mutuality with the situation. But he emphasizes, Kentlin emphasizes, that the body is the situation. So when you talk about living as a body, as one animal with different bodies, I can relate this to that the body also can be the situation. Yes.

[18:46]

Yeah. Yes, I don't know Gendon's work very well, but I've been the main speaker at four annual conferences. All right, so what else? Yes. Yes. So what came up for me during the during you was trust. So For me, when I thought about it, I think that this is a real attitude, but also an experience, to be able to enter such a monument, to be able to experience enlightenment. So trust is a kind of attitude.

[19:51]

And trust is an experience in which, again, that increases the ability to take this attitude. which also gives you the possibility to enter more into this field of enlightenment. So this is something I was talking about. Yeah, I can't not know German, but in English the words allow, accept, trust are all words you can use to try to open up the

[21:17]

interdependent fee. I don't know how that works in German, but in English you can use the words to allow, to accept, to trust and to open this field of interdependence. Yes, me too. Yes, I think that is true. For me, the point is that it seems to me that this is a kind of necessity to be able to open oneself to that. Yes. And at the same time, I'm questioning you. I also am questioning and asking whether it might happen . Yeah, . I wish I could talk about mine without talking about mine.

[22:55]

I wish I could talk about mine without talking about mine. But usually I'm talking about the mind without mentioning the mind. Because I'd rather have it sneak up on you suddenly. Enlightenment is a shift. It's experienceable when it's a shift. And there is lots of shifts. We have the advantage, I think, as Western practitioners. We're more likely to have worldview shifts in the context of Asian Western worldviews because they are significantly different.

[24:13]

So you can have a shift from one worldview to another worldview. And that's considered a kind of... It's experienced as enlightenment, but it's a kind of secondary enlightenment. Secondary life. Don't tell anybody I said that. Fundamental enlightenment would be a shift from a world view to no world view. To a mandala field which has no direction, no center. Where such things as shape, borders, inside, outside, where such things as shape, borders, inside, outside, The borders inside and middle and so forth are supplied, but they're fundamentally not there.

[25:57]

neurologically or something like that, physioneurologically, we could say it's a shift from, again, the contents of mind to the field of mind. Now, if I don't say field, I could say the space of mind with no center. You have to kind of play with this because you can't conceive of something which doesn't have a shape or something. So here this is carrying uncorrected mind to extreme. So as you see yourself forming borders and centers and so forth, you try to take that away.

[27:21]

You try to let that not happen. and you find yourself in a directionless space. Dogen, the good old Dogen, says, He says, sometimes, I enter a profound state, enter an ultimate state. and offer you profound discussion, simply wishing you to be intimate with your field of mind.

[28:39]

But this is a complex statement. He doesn't say by implication I as a Buddha or I as Dharmakaya. enter a profile at an alternate state, which is I, Eddie, I, Dickie Burke. Yeah, I, Johannes Hope. eternal alternate state. And he says, sometimes, not all times, sometimes, I, the keeper, I mean, [...]

[30:00]

What's the dragon boy? enter an ultimate state. Now, what he means in Buddhist way of thinking, he enters a samadhi which has no center. And from that, So it has no center or no direction, but from that he offers profound discussion. And all he hopes for, he simply wishes that you are thoroughly intimate with your field of knowledge.

[31:14]

Er hofft, dass du dringend vertraut bist mit deinem Feld des Marktes. So again, just look at this conception. He's making a cohesion between his entering an ultimate state and you being intimate with your own field of mind, and if you're intimate with your field of mind, and I, for example, and dream a profound samadhi, then whatever I say is... is a profound discussion, as he puts it, which allows us to be simultaneously intimate with the field of mind.

[32:49]

So I think we need to speak a little bit more about this field of mind. We have these two words, three words. Field of mind. Or maybe field and mind. Or space of mind. And I think if we can together get a feel for this physical field, for this field of one, An operational, conceptual sense of this field of mind. I say operational. conceptual sense.

[34:54]

Because I don't want just a conceptual sense. I want a conceptual concept which can operate within us. You know how to operate a car. And you know how the car operates to the extent that you also repair the engine. So you need a car mechanic, you need an operational sense concept of the engine. So, if you are a mechanic, you have to have an understanding of the car, that it allows you

[36:07]

So if we can discover among ourselves an operational concept of field of mind, and let's not start with preparing us to understand that we already have. You know, when I do a seminar, I try to start As much as possible, obviously. I may have studied a core 10, 20, or 30, or 50 times. and gone over it in a seminar many times.

[37:14]

But as much as possible, I try to, each time I practice in the seminar with the company, I try to get rid of all previous ideas. And any insights I've had to in the past, I try to get rid of them. Because I won't find anything new if I relate it to what I already knew. Yeah. So... If we could discover here an operational concept, the field of mind and the contents of mind, and we can

[38:29]

use that to notice our experience. Discover a concept which lets us notice our experience in ways we never have before. And the world in its in its extraordinary and absolute uniqueness. It always can be completely, can be thoroughly new, even in the context of . Let's, after the break, look at can get a deep feel for this field of mind.

[39:56]

Thank you very much. Vielen Dank. Anybody want to say something? You said something like that words convey the information. But it's so different.

[41:02]

Why are there sometimes books which are so immediate, a great kind of immediate sensation? Or translations. Or translations. So words are quite complex in what they can convey. For instance, when you look at Kars' translation of Dogen, you sometimes have to think, if there would be nothing between, it would be transmitted without loss. The translation there was not so tangible. So, that's true. So, that's interesting. I don't know if there's no layer, but in any case, some writers and some speakers have the ability

[42:14]

perhaps convey in the context we're speaking now the field of mind as well as the contents of mind. And one thing we discussed while you weren't here Sometimes. Sometimes. Sometimes. I, which is the name of his temple, sometimes I enter an ultimate state and offer profound discussion. simply wishing that you be steadily intimate with your field of mind.

[43:37]

Now, probably none of us have heard a high school or college or whatever teacher say that to us. I mean, if a professor had opened a university, it said, I, Professor Schmitz. Professor Schmitz will enter an ultimate state. And I simply wish you to be steadily intimate with your field in mind. Probably the people, at least in American universities, complain if I...

[44:54]

Wenn er nicht eine permanente Anstellung hätte, die sich in seiner ganzen Lebenszeit erstellt. There you are. Our host. Wow. Is that a picture of you? Thank you. It's wonderful, won't you put it right up there? Yes, this. This is a type of stupid, you see? Wait for it. I'll see you at the interruption. You're going to put it up? Yes. All right. Interrupt you first. My jacket is always my purse.

[46:12]

They always say on the airplane, do you want me to take your jacket? No, that's my purse. So I think the reason I put in the context Professor Schmitz because it's important to see how different it is than we would usually say so. Sometimes I, Professor Schmitz, enter a ultimate state and offer profound discussion, simply wishing that you are steadily, steadily, the word I didn't use before, Simply wishing that you are steadily intimate with your field one.

[47:27]

And you really get an examination at the end of the semester and show me how steadily you are with your mind. It's obviously a hard thing to test for. So, Dogen would wish and I would wish and we as practitioners wish that we are can be steadily intimate with our field of mind. Now, I think it's useful to look at the kind of technology behind a statement like that.

[48:51]

Not the psychology behind that, but the mindology behind that. Yeah. First it requires that you become aware of the sensorial world as appearance. I mean, only if you want to do this.

[50:00]

If you don't want to do it, just don't pay any attention. I mean, we're living in this world. It seems to be out there. Yeah, that seems like we're living in a container. The world in the container is already there. And we have this hat. And it's good enough. We can catch this way. But From the point of view of Buddhism, this is delusion. To think you live in a container is delusion. And the container is filled with entities.

[51:13]

But from the point of view of Buddhism, they aren't entities, they're active. Michael just showed me a tea bowl. has got the shape of a teeple, but it doesn't have the activity of a teeple. It's not It's not conceived of as an activity, it's conceived of as a shape. We know these trees, beautiful trees here, Rastenberger, are activities, each one's activities. But so is the bus and the subway activities.

[52:32]

Not only are they manufactured and invented and so forth, but they're activities and you get on them and you look at them and so forth. Now, what's the difference between viewing them as activities and viewing them as entities? Maybe there's no difference. But I think, I mean, when you think about it, there's no difference.

[53:35]

But when you experience about it, there's a big difference. When you Emphasize, train yourself, train yourself, subway yourself, train yourself to think of them as activities. Then you begin to notice your activity in noticing. Okay. So this in effect is a teaching. To notice things as activities and not as entities. Now I guarantee you it makes a big difference.

[54:38]

But there's no way you can know the difference Unless you start doing it. The problem is it's not so easy to notice things as activities. You can notice it for a few moments, but to notice it continuously. To be steadily intimate with your field of mind. To be steadily intimate with the activity of the mind. Now I'm not right now saying steadily intimate with the activity of the field of mind.

[55:48]

I want to keep it simple. Just steadily intimate with the mind as an activity. Now to be steadily intimate with the mind as an activity requires the practice of mindfulness. A kind of, as you said, density, and sometimes I use a tensity. a kind of density, or sometimes I say a kind of cohesion. There's no such word in English as intensity. But for me it's a combination of attentional density. And you'd be surprised when you view things as inseparable from me, as an activity of mine.

[57:19]

You look at a flower. You feel the flower as an activity. It needs to be watered. And I used to practice with flowers, cut flowers and potted flowers at breakfast. And even cut flowers. While we were having breakfast, changes like that. But usually we just, they're there, they're pretty, but they're an entity, not active.

[58:29]

Now this is called the practice of direct perception. Just when you can, and as I say, homeopathic or acupuncture doses. You give direct attention to something. To give direct attention means you're also giving attention to your attention. And you have to get used to this. It takes a while. Because usually we might give attention to the flower.

[59:31]

But Buddhist practice is separate. Buddha teaches us to give attention to attention itself as well as the flower. And really, if you do not make this shift into giving attention to attention, you never are really practicing Buddhism. We may benefit from the worldviews of Buddhism, compassion, methods, and so forth. But if you want to be inside Buddhism, you have to develop the habit So it's not this object, it's not just an object of a bell or a tikka.

[60:44]

It's simultaneously the kind of mind that appears when I look at it. So every object from the point of view of practice, is a mind object. Now when I touch this to my forehead, this is quite cold. So, As a cold object, which is different than this, not so cold object, there's a different feeling of mind that appears with a cold object than appears with a warm object.

[62:00]

So what the sensorium is called for. Within the five senses. Yeah, and even sound, even though this is a bell. And I'm not ringing him. Still, the absence of sound is called for. So in Buddhism, there's six senses, not five. Six senses, not five. There's the physical sense. And there's the mental, it's also the sense.

[63:10]

Because it's a source, the senses are understood as sources of the way the world comes into existence. So the world is the senses are the sources of experience. So in that sense, that way of understanding, mind is one of the sources of experience. So one of the sources of my experience of this bell is all my associations with bells. But also, just warming up, I'm warming this kind of thing up. It's not so bad anymore, no.

[64:26]

Now I'm warming up my trance. Thank you. For later. Later. Yeah. So that this object is always there.

[64:57]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_75.15