In other words, first, if somebody teaches me some German words, at first it's just a list. It's not a vocabulary until I see how it works in a sentence to produce some kind of meaning. So I think what, when we're starting out here, although you all know most of this stuff. We have to shift into this way of thinking, which we don't do most of the time. Just talk about a number of things to create an inventory of items. And in the process, the next few days, maybe it turns into a vocabulary. We can see how it works together. So in turning this inventory into a vocabulary, it helps me if you have some comments or anything you want to say so I can see, because what's important is how it works together, not just the items.

[01:27]

Yeah. In the sense that the perception should be free of conceptualization. These villages, they created a concept by either saying this is a cult or somebody's going crazy here. And already this creates fear. I agree that...

[02:32]

Yeah, what about just noticing the movements and the power and maybe the form it takes of a kidney and naming it. Isn't that already also conceptualization of some sort? What do you think about it, or maybe the author or the person who said this? Well, I would say that what Dignaga wanted us to do is to notice without naming. Now we have to look at what do we mean by conceptualization. Of course, if you think and notice, it's a kind of concept. But he means, he doesn't mean don't think.

[04:06]

He means don't think in a way that we're calling conceptualization. Does that make sense? Yeah. Partly you have a gradient here or a range. There's more naming and less naming. And you're trying to move toward less naming. and then try to move in the direction of less naming. Yes.

[05:10]

Yeah. Concepts in name are the main way our society sticks together and if you try to loosen yourself from this concept society will try to keep you. Are there different ways how society can think better than concept and name? Because if you leave all this space, somehow lead in society, and you would be punished for that. If you let them know. They wouldn't know. They'd find out. and to build concepts, what are the main ways in which societies are held together and communicate with each other.

[06:19]

And if you lose this space, then the others will find out that they will not want to lose this space. And so my question is, is there any other way? Okay. Yeah. But we're not talking about not ever naming or conceptualizing. We're talking about a process of knowing. Where knowing without conceptualizing is a way of knowing that you develop. Conceptualizing is also a way of knowing. Yeah, I mean, if there's a fire here, I don't say, let's stand here and appreciate this red object.

[07:41]

I say, that's a fire extinguisher. Grab it and do such and such. Somebody was just at Johanneshof and said, criticized our fire extinguisher placement. They said, for example, they should be low down because somebody will grab it and it's heavy and they drop it on their foot. And there should be two. Because the first one you do wrong and it squirts all over the place and you need a second one. So this is useful conceptualization. But if I'm looking at you, for example and I notice that whenever I'm with a person, any person I have an experience of self and other.

[09:07]

And I tend to abide, stay, in the distinction between self and other. That would be a form of perceiving through conceptualization. Okay. So, if I, when I'm talking to somebody, If I can begin to notice that I constantly have a habit of creating a distinction of self and other, perhaps I can pull my energy out of that distinction of self and other at least a little bit. And if I do that, I think you may experience if you try this that the simple fact of sentience lights up. I think that's one of the aspects of being in love is the distinction of self and other is lessened and you find yourself in a somewhat different world.

[10:38]

And maybe Buddhism is a voluntary decision to fall in love continuously. By constantly not, by removing the self-other distinction as part of knowing. And letting the self-other distinction come back as well. So that would be part of what Dinagya means by perception without conceptualization. So I think our society and culture function better if people had that kind of knowing as well.

[11:48]

But no means means that you walk around spaced out in non-dualism. But I don't think... Yes, go ahead. What I meant is that if you have certain concepts or certain conceptualizations, you participate in a certain discourse that will arise. and you have to participate in this discourse. For instance, we are living in a modern world, and the world will develop in this and this direction, and therefore we have to do this and that in order to participate in this world. We have to develop these and these skills and not these skills.

[12:51]

And if you stop to participate in this discourse, you will become an outsider somehow, or somehow you will become an outsider. So that was not what I meant, but I meant that from certain conceptualizations, discourses arise, and discourses can, for example, be like this and that, and they develop in this and that direction, and therefore it is necessary to develop the abilities, and if you do not participate in a discourse, then you become an outsider. Yes, that's what I meant. You know, I understand your concern. I think I understand your concern. But I think you can do both at once. I mean, I can listen to you conceptually and make sense of what you're saying, but I can also refrain from that being the primary way I listen to you.

[13:51]

And I think the more I do that, the more I'll hear you fully. And in a way this has something to do with living in physical space rather than mental space. I think it has something to do with living in such a kind of physical space and not so much in a mental one. In my practice, that was the difference between the kind of counting and the kind of following. With the breath count you have a concept, you don't go up to 500, you go up to AC, and it's a paradigm stand, in the moment when you stop counting and you follow the breath, then you notice that every breath, that is, practically before you know it, is repeatable.

[14:52]

And the more you do that, for me, that's exactly the difference between conceptual perception and more physical, central perception. And you have to train that. Now look at the senses, then you notice something, The habit of energy is that you can't focus on it. First of all, it doesn't work that way, just as such, longer than without a verbal function. But if you visualize that, then you see that the field of training is so easy to take with this step. Katha talked about what an important step it was in his practice relating to what Eric said between naming and concepts and naming on a lesser degree of concepts, the shift between naming, counting your breath and following your breath. What an important shift that was in practice. Yes, I understand.

[15:55]

Yes. Naming can also be a freeing. You just name something. Oh, that's anger. So naming can function to free you from... This is a long breath. Yes, this is a long breath. It's a short breath. Yes. This is exactly what I wanted to address, that I sometimes find it very difficult here with myself, but also of course with clients, to find out what the concepts really are, because they are usually not aware, and that it is there, first of all, to open up, and I also wanted to ask again, whether to be identified with a concept or not to be identified, or rather not to know that one is identified.

[17:01]

Yes, exactly. So whether the terminology fits that one is also identified or practically identified, but without really knowing it consciously. And what I find there is quite exciting. Yeah, that's often a question I have for myself but also in the work with my clients. Like what is the concept and actually what is the concept somebody is identified with to like a detective to work with the people to help them to identify with their concept. And it's not easy to distinguish between somebody who doesn't even know what kind of concept he or she is identified with or sort of being free of a concept. And in this kind of muddy area, I try to work and find a way in myself and in the work with clients. Because concepts that somebody is not identified with are very tricky.

[18:04]

I think it's not possible to get loose of something that I don't know. It's very difficult to be free of something that you don't know that you are identified with. There are concepts which are like closed rooms. And there are concepts which are like a lot of open doors. And how I would understand what you said is that first you need to discover in yourself, or if you're working with someone else, how they identify themselves, or how they have hidden concepts of themselves. And then you try to make the hidden concepts more conscious,

[19:05]

And then you try to change those concepts from closed ones to open ones. And then you can start thinking about being free of concepts or practicing. But some concepts you can't put down. They're like suitcases that are glued to your hands. And you keep putting the bags down, but you can't let go of them. I suppose it was monkeys who you can catch by opening a small hole in the coconut. The monkeys will put their hands in it to get some food. And they can let go of it and take their hand out, but they won't let go of it so you can come and catch them because they simply won't let go of the food that's inside the cloak.

[20:24]

So you have to get people to have suitcases which at least they can put down, you know. And so you have to say that people just get suitcases that they can at least park. What was helpful to me was simply to change concepts, and this change of concepts, that is, the standing of the suitcase and then taking it in another one, this space in between is then such a moment where conceptlessness arises, and that is then such an aha experience. But I have the feeling that it is necessary to be in motion, Yeah, that has helped me a lot, you know, to just put one suitcase down and then maybe pick up another one. And these moments in between the suitcases, that I think in my experience is some kind of area without concepts.

[21:29]

And it's brief moments, it's intense moments, and it helps me to really be in movement to experience those moments. A brief moment or a taste is all you need. Because it becomes knowledge. And then it can really change how you function. So ideally you want to create situations which give people brief moments of knowledge. If I think again, I'm trying to imagine with you a psychology which can use the practices and wisdom of Buddhism. and Buddhism not as a religion but as an inner science so I think one level is just to see the practices and to see what practices you can give people that they can imagine doing

[22:37]

Now, I think if you take, I don't know, Eric knows Michael's, Michael's parents. But I think they had no interest in Qigong and karate and judo and all that stuff. They did? I got the impression that they got the feeling of it from Eric, from Mikhail. I don't know. Oh, really? Okay. And they are interested in a lot of... Weird things, actually. And then from the point of view of the wheelchair. Okay, so let's talk about something else. It's another example. Sometimes I've seen a person who, because their son practices, at some point in life they start to practice, and it's the son practicing that made it possible. So I'm just saying that we have to find some sort of territory that gives a person permission to try a practice.

[24:07]

But there may be some practices, as it's easier and easier to introduce meditative practices to people these days. So it seems to me the first step is, what meditative practices can you introduce to people that don't seem too weird? And then you as psychotherapists, those of you who are, it's, I think, necessary for you to understand those practices much more thoroughly than they do. Because how you apply a practice, like the distinction between conceptualization and naming and thinking, if you don't have a real sense of that, then if the person gets stuck in the practice, you have no way to help them there.

[25:37]

So what I'm trying to talk about is how these practices, the topography of these practices... Ricky, you started to say something before? Yes. I want to see the lesser naming. Naming is a very important part, I guess so, in this noticing. in the distinction of self and other. So if I'm naming it exactly, then I just identify myself.

[26:47]

I reach to another, shift something. So I think naming is an important part. I think at this point, when we have spoken so much about naming, I think that naming at the point where we notice something is very important at this point, because this distinction of I am self and someone else has to be met and asked exactly, so that this shift happens somewhere else. Can you also translate what she said? Yes, she said it in English. I'd like you to translate so I understand it. Sorry, I spaced out. Because I didn't quite understand what you meant. Benenet is also a Buddhist practice.

[27:53]

Benenet is also a Buddhist practice. So where is the less benenet? Where is the benenet, that it is a practice? If we look at the gradient range, I think Ulrike's question is where does the practice of naming really is located in this range, or where is it more like a concept? And I remember, I think, wasn't it with you guys that Roshi once explained about naming the permanent and naming more the impermanent? Wasn't that here? Okay. It's 6.30, so we should stop in a moment.

[28:53]

But this is a good example of looking at something carefully. There's a difference between naming a tree and naming a breath. If you name a breath, you're clearly naming something that's disappearing. So if you practice in Zen and mindfulness naming activities, Und so die Praxis des Benennens, zum Beispiel in Achtsamkeit, in Zen, ist, dass man jetzt Aktivitäten benennt. Und so ist die Praxis hauptsächlich Aktivitäten zu benennen und nicht Objekte. Das ist eine große Veränderung. Und das Benennen wird dann aus der Syntax herausgenommen. So you're not naming as part of language where the word gets swept up into a sentence which goes off in some direction.

[30:02]

Yeah, you're pulling the name out of syntax. You're pulling the word and just changing it into a name. And you're also embodying the word. You're naming an activity which you are engaged in. which is a process of embodiment. So let's say that a person, a particular person, has a selfish idea of themselves. And it would be better for them to have an unselfish idea of themselves. But there's no basis for the unselfish idea themselves in their personal history.

[31:11]

We could substitute anything here. I'm just using this as an example, a selfish idea versus an unselfish idea. Okay, so there's no basis. You can't get them to accept an unselfish idea. Because it doesn't make any sense in their history, in their anxiety. So then you give them a practice of embodying the unselfish idea. And that's basically a mantric-like practice. You get them to tie it to, say, the 100,000 bows in Tibetan Buddhism. So with each bow, you repeat this unselfish idea. And what's discovered in Buddhism is that even if it has no relevance to you, you're embodying it, and it'll come up when you need it.

[32:38]

So these kind of preparatory practices in Zen are sashin-type practices. And attempting to get the person to be in physical space rather than mental space. So then the naming is not only a naming of activity, but it's a naming which embodies you, connects you physically with the phrase. On a bodily way, then often it'll have more power in the way you function than unembodied phrases or ideas that only have a mental base in your history. So I think again this is a good example of looking more carefully at concepts, naming, what you're naming, and so forth.

[33:50]

Okay, well, we seem to be mixed up in all this. So let's sit for a minute or two. Thank you for the discussion.

[36:44]

And I guess those who want to sit, we will sit at 7.15. Anything you'd like to bring up this morning to start out with? Yes. I would really like to know a few words about what Suzuki Roshi meant with perfecting the personality, if you could tie that up a little bit for us. I want to untie it, not tie it up. I think that I'll talk about that the last day or two. I was afraid you would.

[37:59]

But, you know, that keeps you all here. And Yeshua. Those of you with imperfect personalities may want to leave. I'm sorry, but you walked into that. I'm sorry, but you brought that up yourself. Yesterday, what stuck with me was the tension between naming and not naming. And it came out that that there are simply opportunities, which are very important to name, and that's where the keyword conflicts came up.

[39:23]

And I think, if you want to get the personality of Volkmar, then you have a lot to do with how I deal with conflicts. and I escalate, de-escalate. And that also has a lot to do with naming, or that I show myself and that the other shows himself and so on. And that is something that concerns me a lot, and of course I am also interested in the Buddhist view, for example, of conflict management. Well, I'm still in the middle of dealing with what we talked about yesterday, naming and not naming. And what I'm particularly referring to is, you know, when sort of conflicts emerge.

[40:23]

And in the middle of a conflict, I think it's very important to name things in order to either escalate or de-escalate the situation. And I feel that's a very important strategy. And I'm interested how Buddhism deals with conflict management, also in relationship to naming and not naming. I probably can't answer that. But I'm answering that way in order to create a conflict. Just because Buddhism doesn't go about it the way you're speaking about it. These are practice techniques in Buddhism.

[41:37]

And while they have a philosophical dimension and cast or look, They're not meant to spread over everything. So we're talking about naming as a practice in a particular way. It doesn't affect all ways names are used. I think sometimes, and I'm not saying you're doing this, but we philosophize it too much that if I say to be free from thinking, we think we should be free from thinking always. That's not the point. Sometimes we just philosophize too much.

[42:47]

I'm not saying that you do that, but for example, when it comes to not thinking, then we say, we think now, we shouldn't think, and think, we should just never think. You added something. Did I? Well, I didn't make anybody laugh, you did. I didn't make anybody laugh, you did. It was a good translation. Now I feel helpless. I'm outnumbered. Yes? A congenial translation. So my sense is to speak to you as prose. And I'm not trying to speak, to relate to you individually or together as so much in terms of your practice.

[43:50]

So I'm not taking responsibility for your practice. I mean, for example, in a Sashin I'm taking responsibility for people's individual practice. Because we try to create in Sashin a sufficient experiential base so the teachings can be heard as practice. And here we're not sitting that much, and also I'm not trying to create an experiential basis. I'm just putting some teachings out there, presenting it as much as, more than showing it.

[44:56]

And I suppose at this meeting this year, I'm thinking of you as not psychotherapists, but dharma therapists. And I'm imagining there's something that we could create or we could do called dharma therapy. So from that point of view, I would speak perhaps this time especially on the craft of practice. The craft or details of this wisdom teaching. And since you're pros, I would leave it to you to put it together. So, something else? Yes. from yesterday, what you said about this swing of being in a mental existence, more in the physical, i.e.

[46:49]

physical existence, and I experience this in my work and also in my everyday life, and as helpful or as saving, yes, when that is possible. I'm still dealing with the shift you talked about yesterday from the mental base to a more physical base. And that's what I'm dealing with in my work. And I often experience that this is actually what is redeeming or saving something. My thinking has to do with the forming of concepts, of the continuity which is based on thinking, and on groups and on societies which are referring on the concepts and on thinking to include a manual.

[47:58]

And on the other hand, continuity on the body or the breath and so on, and groups which are assuring on body to to make a person to the member of the group. And just that shift in some way going from thinking to body makes some fear because I'm losing the membership of a group, or at least I feel And it's just thinking there, and it knows there are societies which are referring on thinking, and there are societies which are referring on body, and sometimes those which are referring on body, they are more simple, more natural, and so on, but it has not to be like that. Okay.

[49:00]

I think that this shaping of concepts and the continuity of thinking, that there are forms of groups, forms of society, that determine the membership in the group, especially through these conceptual constructs, and that on the other hand there are societies and groups that rely on the continuity of the body, breathing and so on, that these are simply two different forms of society. And that this transition from thinking to the body, that this was also in that way fear, because I also run the risk of being too attached to a specific type. Okay, I heard you. So let me write something up here, because I think if we take certain phrases, or whatever, and can hold them in place, mind, during our days, it will be helpful.

[50:20]

Yes, I would like to write something down here, because I think if we simply carry certain sentences or statements during these days within us, that this can then be helpful. It's okay. I was not the same. This is the first, as I said, it's the first statement or beginning of the Pali Abhidharma.

[52:37]

Now, Dharma we've spoken about. Maybe I should translate this. Yeah, translate it, please. When a healthy, conscious attitude Okay, so it becomes interesting. What is a healthy conscious attitude? And what is when? And what is arisen? Now, I think that anybody who's a psychotherapist or interested in healing, this is, you know, right up your alley. This is the center of what therapy is about.

[53:42]

But then we have, of course, here, now we're talking about Buddhism here, so we're talking about belonging to a world of sensuous relatedness. And accompanied by permeated by serenity. And linked to knowledge. Now I'll be done. I'd be taken to mean something like special teaching or to face ultimate reality or something like that.

[54:59]

And Abhidharma is the teaching of facing momentariness. Okay. Now the Abhidharma was developed between three centuries before Christ and three centuries after Christ. And it was formulated pretty much finally in the 4th century as the basis of all of Buddhism. And in the Heart Sutra where they say no No eyes, no ears, no nose, etc.

[56:22]

That's all Abhidharma teaching. Okay. Now, why is momentariness emphasized? Because it's emphasized because of philosophical reasons, Reality. It's emphasized for therapeutic reasons. Healing. And it's emphasized for sociological reasons. I mean, soteriology is the usually teaching of Jesus or Christian teaching of salvation.

[57:28]

But it literally means to save or to make safe, etc. So every teaching in Buddhism has these three elements. It's presented, it's... It's necessary that it's philosophical because it has to be coincident with reality. But we don't talk about all aspects of reality. We talk about those aspects of reality in a way that's therapeutic. And in addition, we talk about those aspects of reality which also lead to enlightenment. Okay. Now today, since I know you're beyond concern with enlightenment, Oh, you're already enlightened. Yeah. In any case, I'm really speaking about it in terms of its philosophical and therapeutic aspects.

[58:50]

Now why are you laughing so much this morning? It's enlightening. And then there's the humorological aspects. okay permeated [...] okay Okay.

[60:15]

I think if we speak about these teachings in terms of how they reflect reality and how they can be therapeutic, it makes it easier to think of these things and talk about them in ways that can be used in psychotherapy. If we speak about them more in a sociological sense, Then we have to talk more, then we should really only talk about these in the context of a lot of sitting and so forth. And in fact we should withhold perhaps this aspect until it's revealed through this aspect.

[61:31]

Yeah. Does that make sense? So I'm not speaking to you as practicing Zen Buddhists, but as Dharma therapists. If you want to sprinkle in the possibility of enlightenment, that's up to you. Okay. Okay, now, Dogen's most famous fascicle of his teaching or section of his teaching is called the Genjo Koan.

[62:38]

And genjo means to complete, arise. Or to complete what appears. And koan means universal, particular. Okay. Now in the Chinese way of entitling things, usually the title is meant to be the complete teaching of what follows the title.

[63:47]

So this extraordinary fascicle is summed up in this Kenjo koan. So here, what I'm concentrating on is this first phrase of our theme, Transforming the Present. So, Genjo Kon means to transform the present by completing what arises. And to complete and to see what arises as simultaneously universal and particular. And here you have the idea of everything is interdependent

[64:48]

and also that everything is interpenetrating. So if I pick up this, I pick up everything. If you went to Mars and you found a blade of grass or something, you'd have to know that everything that is the earth was somehow happening there. Because a single blade of grass is not possible without everything that is our earth. So that everything that is our earth permeates this blade of grass. Now, maybe this is the kind of schmaltzy way of looking at things. But maybe Buddhism is a return to schmaltz.

[66:37]

In other words, these more poetic or romantic or whatever ideas about how we exist, we get cut off from usually. I think it's partly because we also actually don't, they're ideas, but we don't experience them. So this is also to bring this back into our experience. Dogen also says stone maiden gives birth to a child.

[68:07]

In the middle of the night. He also said, the blue mountains are walking. He also said, the blue mountains are moving. I'm thinking of how to say it, without doubt.

[69:27]

The walking of the blue mountains is the same as our walking. I'm trying to think of a way to give you a sense of the difference between mental space and embodied space. All right. In mental space, a stone maiden gives birth to a child in the middle of the night just doesn't make any sense. But in physical space, it's automatically two-thirds true.

[70:34]

Because there is such a thing as giving birth to a child. And there is such a thing as in the middle of the night. So when you practice with a phrase, when you take it out of here, we're back to naming. When we take a phrase, a word, let's say a word is a part of speech. It's an adjective, an adverb, or whatever. But a name isn't necessarily a part of grammar. For instance, I could have a nickname, Rich. But Rich as a word isn't what I am. Unfortunately. So Rich as a name isn't really necessarily part of the ordinary way of looking at words. So when you are in a physical space, you're in a sense pulling words, perhaps into names.

[71:55]

Or you're pulling words out of syntactical space into semantic space. It becomes a... What does this mean? Okay, I'm using syntax as the grammar of a sentence. I'm using semantic to mean a sign. Okay. Or in the metaphorical space. For instance, I might say the bathroom lamp. Yeah, that's okay. There's the bathroom lamp. It needs a bulb. I know Americans who travel in Europe, particularly Germany I guess, and they carry bulbs with them because in the pension bathrooms the bulbs are so dim they can't see to shave.

[73:13]

Because we're used to bright light and the pensions are always saving electricity. Particularly as our eyes grow dimmer. Because you get up so early. That's probably the problem. Bleary. Okay. But if you just have the word lamp, this is something that has some power. It's not bathroom lamp. Or desk lamp. Be a lamp unto thyself. So that's the kind of difference I'm pointing out when it's in physical space, where you embody it.

[74:39]

Lamp, lamp, lamp. And you say it like a mantra. So you don't understand koans as a practice unless you understand that you have to take these phrases out of syntactical space into mantric space or bodily space. So if you think about a stone maiden gives birth at night, you think, oh, this is some kind of riddle, I don't know what it means, etc., But if you just stay with the phrase, a stone maiden gives birth to a child at night, you begin to feel night. You begin to feel what happens in darkness. As the Sandokai says, myriad streams flow in darkness.

[76:02]

Which means right now, there's a great deal that's happening in this room outside of our sense perceptions. There's a great deal of connectedness happening which isn't, you can't say it's sound, it's sight or something. And in that flowing in the darkness, there's a kind of birth. And it's amazing that anything is born, anything appears. As is said, it's a miracle that anything exists at all. But it's hard for us when our sense of continuity is always in the channel of thought.

[77:13]

To experience anything, to experience this as only an idea, it's a miracle, anything exists, well that's, you know, who cares? But in physical space, it is a miracle that anything exists. I like the word miracle because the root of it means the same as smile. Kind of like the basic reaction to something, to smile. So perhaps even stone or a maiden.

[78:15]

A maiden is not usually connected with birth. A stone maiden gives birth to a child in the middle of the night. And the blue mountains walking. If I'm standing here, I'm not walking. But in fact, I'm not standing. I'm coming to stand. I'm always coming in to stand. If you have to stand a long time in a queue, you know that you have to keep coming in to stand it. So standing is an activity. Even if I step forward, There's a kind of standing as an activity that's even a little step. So that activity of walking and standing is really the same activity.

[79:20]

And likewise, a mountain, it looks like it's just always mountaining, like we're always standing. The mountain is always coming into the activity of being a mountain. So this kind of phrase you don't get if you just think about it. You have to feel your way into them. And you know, it's funny, like in Asia, in Japanese thinking about, Dharmic thinking about these things, a square is made from five points. If I draw a square, Certainly it's four points.

[80:47]

Right. But what's been forgotten there? I made the five four points. There's no such space without a fifth spot that makes it or that observes it. So in mental space, It's four points, but in physical space it's at least five points. And the fifth point is usually indicated as something that goes up and down, but also goes sideways. If you're a farmer in kind of an undeveloped area, the size of your field is determined by your sheep or your cattle.

[81:50]

The field moves this way. So the field always has a center from which the cows are going to walk or something. So the... So the sense of five points is that there's always in anything, there's an upward connection and there's a sideways connection, this fifth point, the center, which makes it happen. So do you see, when you think of things physically, you think of them rather differently. That's why in Buddhism, or in this way of thinking, we say there's ten directions, not four directions.

[83:01]

Because, again, the ten directions are, of course, north, south, east, west, and also the southwest, etc., but also up and down. But it goes both directions. And the sense of the ten directions is not that it's over there in the north, but the north is coming to you. And the heaven is coming to you. So that's quite a different feeling when you feel north and south as a kind of something that you're moving within. So one of the reasons we do zazen is to interrupt our usual channels of continuity.

[84:13]

And lastly, again, the way all human beings are, we go along in our thinking like a kind of channel. And sometimes we stop and take a breather or something, but we have a tendency to have this channel. And now zazen is to stop and open the sluice gate. you know, that translates, sluice gate is translated, okay, and then let the, from out of this sort of concrete channel, let the liquid of mind come down into the sand of the body. And permeate the body with serenity. Now I'm using images here because images cut across mental boundaries.

[85:18]

And images are more able to catch us, to stay in our mind. And as you know, and as I've said many times, that when we think of mind as a liquid, which again is an image, a metaphor, we can think of mind as different kinds of soup stock. So the mind, when you use images, you generate a different kind of liquid than when you use conceptual thought. So as soon as I use an image, it punctures a little hole in the... channel of thought and the water comes out.

[86:37]

And dream mind is of course a mind in which images float and not conceptual. Maybe it's a good time to take a break. I'm mostly just throwing things out here.

[87:42]

We'll see if we can... Not that I don't want them, but I'm... In English, throwing things out is like throwing them in the garbage or something. It's not that I don't want them. But it's that perhaps we can all together put them together, I hope. In embodied space. Or bodily space. I don't know what word to use. Physical space doesn't... Embodied space... We choose our misunderstandings. Pessimism is not necessarily a healthy conscious attitude.

[88:53]

I enjoy my misunderstandings for a while actually. That's a healthy conscious attitude. So when we come back at 11.30 and we're going to eat, we decide at 1 and stop before 1.

[93:13]

So we decide at 1.30. When do we eat tonight? Did you decide on anything? We decided to come back at 3, is that, or 3.30? 3.30. 3.30, okay. 4.30, 5.30, well, we meet at 6 or 6.30, maybe 6.30. 6.30. Okay. So, halb sieben Abendessen.

[93:37]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_74.48