My whole life aims at me and you. Also mine and yours. My house, my car, my children, my pension insurance. My beard, my beard, my beard. I am easily or quickly hurt and I am quickly ashamed. How shall I change that? That is what I am trying my whole life to. And does it make a difference if the teacher is something which hurts me or is it just someone else saying something which hurts me? Are you asking a question?

[01:06]

What do I do with this? Okay, someone else? I haven't given up. And to what you're saying? So I think it should make a difference whether the teacher says something that might hurt me or somebody else. because when the teacher says that, it should not come from his ego, that is, he does not feel personally hurt and wants to leave my ego, but his motivation when he says something like that

[02:08]

So the teacher, when the teacher says something He doesn't say it from his self or ego or I. We hope. We hope, yes. But he says it to point out something, an area which is maybe my blind spot and where I can practice. what maybe should practice. Whereas usually when somebody else says something which hurts me, it comes from that person's ego and it's between two egos. So I hope it varies. The problem is you care often I look at my relationship with Suzuki Roshi, you care more about what the teacher thinks than most people.

[03:19]

So if they say something, it has a special weight that somebody you just know at the office doesn't have. Okay, someone else. Yes, Judy. However, I'm usually on my best behavior with my teacher. Your best behavior with what? My best behavior with my teacher. And I value the input from my fellow Sala members. Excuse me? I have to turn, excuse me. I have my best behavior when I'm with my teacher. So I value that because even though I try to be even, I do act differently.

[04:22]

So what about Sangha feedback? Yeah, for somebody practicing in a monastic context or a Sangha context. It's a big part of why one practices in the Sangha. Okay, someone else? Yes? I was touched by what Fritz said, just. And it was open, it was honest and it didn't have the taste of someone sitting very long time on this cushion.

[05:31]

And there's a, I sense a certain danger, also with myself, that you get a sort of, you get a rough skin, what is it called now? Tough skin. Yeah, where you rub it like picket. You get calloused and nobody hurts you anyway because you're armed. And when you work for the self and the reaching for the self, it's good to keep yourself open and vulnerable. I would like to add something to what being heard by members of the Sangha or other people, not the teacher. I don't mind and you don't matter. What I mean by the colors is the... Yeah, we understand.

[07:04]

And it's about working with myself and so I try and to take in even and everything what I hear in an even way, in an equilibrated way. Okay. No one else? No human. Yes. When I think of how am I, I don't get along very well. and when I think about myself as what am I I think about a social space and being together with other people and this gives me this feeling that as a social being I say, OK, I support the others and then I have enough growth in me to say OK, I know that I also support myself

[08:38]

When I'm in a social space and I help others, I know that I'm also helping myself. And when I say what, I think of other people, of the social realm, and to get even with others. And I come from a very strict catholic surroundings and where one is being told how you have to live, to say it simple. And I came to the question, what actually do I need?

[09:58]

And I can't really sort of perceive what I need. The Buddhist way of experiencing is I'm allowed to experience what is good and what is not good for me. after the performance of you today before that it is not really about the language of me, you What is meant? Is it really about a context of, okay, Buddhism says this, and I have a different meaning than you?

[11:05]

Where is the limit? Is it about the rain of these words, where it's about you and the limits? Where is it still, that the other and I, Yeah. Referring to what you said this morning, one thing is about words, the other thing is about the, is there a border, a limit, a threshold between I and the others? Where is the I and other limit, border, whatever? I wrestle with, am I doing this for myself or am I doing this for others, what I'm doing? What do I need for myself and for others? My searching. That's my seeking.

[12:14]

Don't forget you're also an other. And that's what I heard out of what you said. Yeah, because we don't, it's not, at least in Zen, it's not you sacrifice yourself for others. Because you're also an other. You take care of yourself and you take care of others. And I'm looking for that balance where I'm taking too much and where I have to withdraw or draw back and say this is too much. Yeah, the sacrifice is, can you take others, not can you sacrifice yourself, but can you take others as seriously as you take yourself?

[13:24]

Or are they as important to you as you are to yourself? Also, das Opfer besteht nicht daran, dich aufzugeben, sondern Opfer besteht darin, And Felix, as Uli pointed out, what you say is quite natural for us. Okay. It's already a step to notice it. To notice that we give preference to our own children and so forth. And There is a sense in the etymology of I, which I always find it useful to look at the etymology of self and I. Because sometimes when you look at the etymology, you're looking at at least one of the most basic experiential levels of what's meant by the word.

[14:56]

So one sense of it is what belongs to me. But another sense is what's familiar to me. And our own children are usually the most familiar to us, more familiar than other children. And we have a special responsibility in relation to the children. And I think children is the clearest example, but it also relates to our house or our farm. So we're already now talking about Zen practice. And I want to hold off in speaking about Zen practice for a while.

[16:13]

But I think the practitioner would be aware that he or she has more responsibility for the familiar And in English, the familiar is obviously related to family. But basically, majamaka practice is to as we talked about in the last weekend is to develop an even mindedness toward everything So although you can have more responsibility for your own children, you can have an even-mindedness which is pretty much the same for every child.

[17:31]

So practice would be to notice that and feel that territory which is rubbing against each other. But also in this, there's an assumption about mind and the importance of an even mind, that's quite unique. That the mind we bring to a situation is maybe the most crucial aspect of the situation for the practitioner.

[18:37]

This is something we'd have to discuss for a while to sort out what that might mean. Okay, someone else? Yes? You talked about the ingredients concerning such an experience of touching the forehead. One of the ingredients was the revitalization which comes up by touching the forehead.

[19:47]

When I feel this revitalization I feel it as a direct reference to my body. And when I feel and sense after this and this localization, I found there is more as there are correspondences in In the body, in the space. But it's more spatial than local. Can you say that? What's the difference between spatial and local? Local is a connotation of being of here and spatial is more like a wide surface.

[21:04]

Surface or volume? Surface. Volume has more sense of that there are boundaries to this volume is being created. And I wonder if this spatial feeling is one of the ingredients or if the local dissolves into this. Are there two things? And I ask myself if there are two things, being special, local, or one is sort of dissolving into the other. Okay.

[22:28]

Okay. Someone else? Yes? I have noticed that when I put my finger on it, and at the same time I feel that I am doing it and that I am receiving it, when I put my finger on forehead and there is a similarity there is a parallelity of can you say it again? a simultaneity of what is the simultaneity? the organs and the fingers if I feel them at the same time strongly I sense at the same time the touching of the forehead and the receiving of it. This is simultaneity. And it helps me the state of what Ulrich described.

[23:34]

It is a kind of penetration and being interwoven with everything. What I find so difficult in my everyday life What I find difficult in my everyday life and by practicing with the Sangha, in the Sangha and being here in Johanneshof? Also ich kenne dieses Gefühl, dass dieses Selbst nicht so, dass das mehr ein Beobachter ist und nicht so ein I have more the feeling of the self as an observer and not as someone which can be heard so easily.

[24:58]

But also the case that you are less often, much less often hurt or insulted here than in the sort of normal world. We have a sign over the door, less insulting please. It's a sign over the door, less insulting please. Yes, and I think this question of feeling nourished, also in my work life and in my household, that I find really difficult, that you really feel nourished. But I found it really difficult having the feeling of being nourished in everyday life or friends or outside of here.

[26:04]

It's really difficult. Because the contact between the different selves takes place on different levels, planes. Or you miss each other. Okay, thanks. Thank you. You know what we're doing here is already very contemporary. way in which we're speaking about this question of Western self and Zen self.

[27:13]

As I pointed out, first of all, just the assumption that there are categories or differentiations or different categories or differences in self is already very contemporary. And And the process by which we're trying to look at Zen, to look at the self, is also very contemporary. In what we talked about earlier, We were using the observational capacity of the mind to study or look at the self.

[28:27]

That's very new in the West. And we were privileging experience over other modes of knowing. That's already very contemporary. So the process we're using to look at what we're thinking of as ahistorical, not limited to history, Sorry, the process we're using to look at self. With sort of the assumption we can look at self in an ahistorical way. He's already, in fact, historical.

[29:49]

I mean, you know, Joyce wrote a novel really about consciousness. Yeah, nobody did that before. And Virginia Woolf wrote about consciousness. And Cezanne... painted not what you see, he painted how you see. He's known for sitting and looking at an apple for two or three hours. Not studying the apple, studying how he sees the apple. That's already very new. And what's interesting, of course, is why did Asian civilization privilege experience and the mind which experiences over other modalities of knowing.

[31:21]

Okay. Other modes of knowing. So we can't get away from the fact that we can't do this ahistorically. We're doing it in a contemporary context and in a contemporary way, even if we don't look at only contemporary forms of self. We can't get past the fact that it is not possible to look at it ahistorically, i.e. outside of the time, so to speak. We can only see it in a contemporary way. Which means we're going to get a contemporary answer.

[32:25]

Hopefully informed by the wisdom of the past. Someone else? Judy, you wanted to say something before. Yeah, the missing ingredient was mind. You know this? How do views undergird? Well, noticing was not missing. Noticing is an activity of mind. But how do views undergird? what the mind doesn't notice.

[33:26]

It seems like it's more doesn't notice. How do you notice what the mind doesn't notice? Yeah, how do views undergird, lay under, what you notice and what you don't notice. And I think more of what you don't notice, the partiality of that is what we just did. Again. Yes. If I think Sophia is your child, I might. Yeah.

[34:29]

Yeah, I didn't specify it, but including in noticing our views and experience, of course, most of our experience and views go unnoticed, but they're still part of our activity. I didn't do that on purpose, but most of our views lie unnoticed under our remarks. Peter? I haven't grasped the question yet. I'll try to get it out of my wrist. I didn't get the question quite, but I'll try nevertheless. The relationship between vulnerability and self- a feeling of self-value, you know, self-appreciation.

[36:00]

And how the relationship exists between practice and the development of the feeling of self appreciation. Practically. I was of the opinion that someone who is very secure of himself and very stable of themselves is not so easily insulted. I hope. And I think I read it from Jack Cornfield, before you start deconstructing your ego, you should have a real good ego.

[37:04]

I don't know a good ego, but a strong sense of self, yes. And on the other side, vulnerability is a feeling which has to do a lot, for me, has a lot with compassion to do. This kind of vulnerability I experience as positive and I like to enhance that. The vulnerability you were talking about before and which one can observe in oneself again and again

[38:08]

Again, not easily acceptable for oneself when you notice it. This isn't a question yet. You don't have to... You can make statements. Nice. Conversation is to be able to... is a process of presenting the converse, the reverse, and so forth. So as far as, since I am not interested in philosophy particularly, We're going to, I think, proceed with this relatedness and comparison of selves through

[39:21]

our experience of self and imagining a self that's experienceable. But if self isn't experienceable, what the heck is it? So even that's an interesting question. Can you have a non-experienceable self? Maybe Leo's Dutch Catholic background wanted him to have a non-experienceable self. Or at least a self he didn't want to experience. We always have to adapt. We always have to adapt, yeah. Okay. It's sometimes useful to look at generalizations.

[41:11]

One of the generalizations in the West is that we're all going to go to heaven. Or we're all going to go to hell. Or we, you know. Or there's going to be a moment where we're stuck. Permanently in heaven which sounds sort of like hell. But let's just imagine that that is a pervasive idea. That's a common idea that's in the background of people's thinking. It means you're going to be separate from others forever. Das bedeutet, dass du von anderen für immer getrennt sein wirst.

[42:18]

I mean, you're separate in this life, you're friendly, and you hope to see your friends in heaven, but you're going to be separate in heaven. You're still going to be you in heaven. Du bist freundlich mit anderen, aber getrennt, aber freundlich mit anderen zusammen hier. Aber wenn du in den Himmel kommst, dann wirst du sozusagen als getrenntes du eben in den Himmel kommen. What if we imagine that every plant went to heaven? I mean, that's what Otmar thinks. They are in heaven. They're all sitting in heaven. Okay, so if every plant went to heaven, heaven is going to be pretty crowded. But although there are there are presently more people alive on earth today than there are in heaven.

[43:20]

In other words, there are more people alive today than have lived in total in all past centuries. So we're going to double the population in heaven. We're working on that. But if you imagine all the plants went to heaven and they all stayed... It's a mind-boggling idea. Okay, so let's shift and have the Asian common idea. Have all been reincarnated? And we will be reincarnated.

[44:26]

Now if that's the sort of generalization you have, it's very different. This body right now is a flow of many bodies that have come through. And when I die, when this whatness dies, it's going to flow into other bodies. So we're just a tube for a moment. So our tubular life has other lives flowing through it and other lives will continue to flow through it forever. As a kind of underlying generalized assumption creates a very different feel for the world you're in.

[45:37]

I have to live in such a way that I will be always separate in a good place and not in hell. or I'm living in a way which already includes a flow of people, and that flow of people will continue from what I do. It's a different sense of location, a different sense of responsibility. And And then, of course, Zen, which is much of Buddhism as well, doesn't emphasize reincarnation.

[46:38]

And, of course, the aim of nirvana is not to be reincarnated. Nirvana is technically to end reincarnation. So that's a rather different concept. I mean, the Zen concept is almost like I've had enough. This is enough. So, someone else? What time is lunch? At one o'clock. At one, okay. When the Asian people do everything right, why aren't they all enlightened?

[47:49]

Who says they do everything right? You said the principal approach of the Asian culture is the right No, I said it's reincarnation. I didn't say it's the right approach. I don't know. I never felt that living in Japan. I mean, it's a different approach. Overall it's a different approach, first of all. And overall it seems to be an approach the West is approaching. Without any, if there were no influence from Asia, we'd still be getting closer to an Asian way of looking at things.

[48:52]

But So we might think it's more compatible but I don't think we can think it's better. Compatible? Compatible. Compatible means to feel comfortable with. You fit together. You and Annika are compatible. That's the hour. That's the hour. I just married them, I should know.

[49:55]

Too many A names. Aren't you? Compatible. Yeah, I mean, we have these categories we put things into. And even if one is better or worse, it's usually more intelligent to put them in categories of their difference. observation is more even-minded. Well, if no one has anything to say, let's sit for a few minutes then.

[51:02]

Ah. You can continue your discussion, our discussion, in sitting mind. In what role does sitting mind have in relationship to the self?

[52:17]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_75.93