untitled

Shunryu Suzuki Transcript

Saturday, July 31, 1965

Tape operator (Richard Baker): Saturday night lecture, beginning at 6:15, by either Reverend Suzuki or Bishop Sumi.

SR: (opening words missed) thank Bishop Sumi for this sesshin. As we did last night, maybe good idea to ask you some question and I will answer briefly the—for the question, and after that you may ask some more questions, you know. In this way we can extend our discussion wider and wider. I think this is, maybe we—our discussion will be more successful, I think. So, if you have some question, please ask me. And—and then you—we will have many questions after my answer and we'll ask, you know, Bishop Sumi to answer for your question.

Student A: Sensei, if our eye moves to the clapper before it sounds, is it already too late?

SR: Excuse me? [Laughs.]

Student A: If our eye moves...

SR: Eye?

Student A: If our eye moves to the clapper...

SR: Eye moves to the crib[?]

Student A: ... to the clapper, follows the clapper before it strikes...

SR: before?

Student A: ... and—and anticipates it, is it already too late?

SR: Already too late? [laughter] Maybe [laughs] this is the question for Bishop Sumi [laughter].

SR: Do you mean, before—listen to the sound before it’s—is it hit you mean?

Student A: Yes. Does that express wrong understanding to be listening for the sound of the clapper?

SR: Mm-hmm, [laughs] now I understand what you say. Where—where your mind is, you know, where—whatever you think, there is—there is something, and that something include you yourself, your big mind or true nature. So, it is already there. But sound you mean I don’t know what do you mean by the sound, but—I think by sound you mean symbolically the true nature, or big mind, or true you. So, if you listen to— if you want to listen, to your—to you—listen to yourself, you know, your own voice, watch the bell before it rings—it is hit. Is that—my answer— do you think my answer is right? [Laughs] what did you meant? [Laughs.]

Student A: I don’t know.

SR: You don’t know! [laughs, laughter]

Student A: I think it’s apt[?], [laughs, laughter] but that’s a matter of faith.

SR: Yeah, that's good. Some more question?

Student B: Is it—is Zen a method of achieving enlightenment is that what it is, generally? Zen, or Zen Buddhism is a method to achieve enlightenment. do you know if it can be achieved through other religions such as Hindu and—the Tibetan lama type thing? Do you know if it can be achieved through those as a vehicle?

SR: Ah...

Student B : ... and if it can’t, what makes Zen Buddhism exclusive?

SR: Yeah, exclusive, yeah that's right [laughter].

Student B: What makes it exclusive? [laughter]

SR: But that kind of understanding of Zen is very narrow understanding of Zen. Soto Zen is not so quite[?]—narrow, you know. Our practice is quite different, as we always discuss about our [traffic noise] Can you hear me?

Students: Yes.

SR: As we discuss our way, always our way is where you practice it, there is enlightenment, you know. But our—even though you do not expect enlightenment, enlightenment is there. Or we can say, if you expect enlightenment, enlightenment will not be there, and you will never attain enlightenment if you practice that kind of Zen, that kind of exclusive Zen, because, you know, that is—that is maybe Zen practice, we cannot say that is not Zen, but that is one of the five school, or one of the eight schools of Zen. That is not original Zen, transmitted by Bodhidharma or Buddha.

You know, before Bodhidharma there was no Zen master; all the—all the buddha—Buddhist practiced Zen. But more and more—Bodhidharma's Zen was not that kind of Zen, and after Bodhidharma we have many and many types of Zen, many schools of Zen. And each school they all kept family—we call family characters [characteristics], and this kind of Zen is one of the five families' model[?] of Zen. But original Zen is to practice Zen as a disciple of Buddha, to practice Zen as he—as Buddha did, is our practice. That is not just to attain some certain master's type of enlightenment.

Strictly—strictly speaking enlightenment may not be the same, you know, according to the master. In—it’s fundamentally it is the same, but there is personal character in it. Without some particular way, original way cannot be expressed, you know, because there is something—because I am here, I can express the original way through me—which is expressed through me is some particular type of Zen.

If we—if people thinks, "My particular Zen is Zen," what—how about others' [laughs] Zen, you know. So, there must—there is clear distinction from true fundamental practice of Zen, and exclusive—some particular schools of (Zen). So, we—if we go back to the origin it is the same. And at the same time, by studying more and more philosophically and various way, we can improve the idea of Zen—like Shobogenzo, you know.

That kind of effort is to make it clear—make the original idea of Zen clear, and make clear distinction from some exclusive and particular Zen. To make original Zen—to make clear original Zen from various types of Zen. Do you understand? That is our effort. That was not—I cannot say "our effort," but Dogen Zenji's effort. So, by Dogen we could resume to our original Zen. So here we have no exclusive idea of Zen, and at the same time, we have many possibility. There’s many possibility of expressing original idea in various ways: you can express Dogen Zenji's spirit in your own way, because we have no exclusive pattern[?] of Zen.

What was your question?

Student C: What is satori?

SR: Satori?

Student C: Emm.

SR: As I said, you know satori is... It is—I don’t know what you mean—what do you mean "what is?" you know [laughs]. "What is satori?" is very difficult question to figure out what you—what kind of, you know, answer you—you expect. "What is satori?" Because satori is, as I explained—as I explained in various way, there is no other way to explain some kind of—various kind of answer to your question. There’s many—various kinds of answer would be—should be prepared, you know, from scientific viewpoint, or psychological viewpoint, or from religious viewpoint. You know, we cannot say what is satori just from one viewpoint.

Psychologists may say "such and such state of mind is satori," you know, that is psychology—psychologist may answer in that way. And scientist may say, you know, "satori is the answer which is—which science cannot answer." That is, to figure out—to qualify the problem which science cannot answer is satori—they may say. So, for them it is some—hypothetical probability is satori. But we cannot believe in scientific probability. So, you may—you will not be satisfied with the—with the scientist answer. Philosopher may say various way, [laughs] you know. So, your question is very difficult to answer. So, the only way, is, as I talked in this sesshin, to, you know, to—to point out the problem—or our most concerning problem, from various viewpoint. And if those viewpoint—answer from various viewpoint was—is not—are not enough, then what we should do is answer. So according to Zen, you know, to—satori should be attained by practice, you know, by practicing[?]. This is truth, as you have understood. Intellectual effort will not satisfy, will not good enough, or will not help you. And scientific effort is not enough, or it is quite different effort from—to—from the point you want.

If so, or if intellectual, or mental function—by mental function, it is impossible to attain enlightenment, then to—by practice or by action—by actual activity we take, by actual activity, to realize our true nature is only way which is—which is left. So, satori is, anyway, in our—by our—will be attained by our practice. Then, how much practice we want [laughs] to attain satori will be your question [laughs]—one year or two year, or how hard [laughs] will be your, you know, question, maybe, or may not be, I don't know.

Student C: Is satori the same thing as enlightenment? Is it another word...

SR: Yeah

Student C: ... for enlightenment?

SR:Yeah, enlightenment and satori is same thing. Enlightenment—I don't know whether it is good translation or not.

Bishop Sumi: I would say, mostly, awareness. Enlightenment must be from Christianity. So mostly say, their best awareness. Is not ???.

Student D: Bishop Sumi, what is written on your stick? The words—calligraphy?

Bishop Sumi: On this?

Student D: Yes.

Bishop Sumi: This is a different calligraph. Means?

Student D: Yes.

Bishop Sumi: You ask what this means?

Student D: What it means, yes?

Bishop Sumi: Er... [laughter]. You can read? You can read?

Student D: No.

Bishop Sumi: Nothing to hold one. Nothing—nothing—nothing hold on. If you catch something, it must be can suffer. Suffer. Suffer.

Student D: separate, yes.

Bishop Sumi: Be rid of, from everything. So, this is it. If we use this, we rid of—must we change everything? Don't you know? ???

Student D: Thank you.

Bishop Sumi: A very famous Zen word, our ancestor.

Student D: Ah-ha. Thank you.

Student E: Did he tell him (loud traffic) did Bishop Sumi tell him these words, the meaning. (To Bishop Sumi) Did you tell him the meaning of those words now?

Bishop Sumi: You can't understand?

Student E: Did you give him the meaning of those words now?

Bishop Sumi: Yes.

Student E: Did you? [laughter]

Bishop Sumi: And how about to you? And how about to you?

Student E: Me? I don't know.

Bishop Sumi: You can't understand English meaning? You can't understand it?

Student E: But did you give him the meaning of them? I don't know.

Bishop Sumi: Oh, you can't understand?

Student E: You told him the words, but ??? I mean, did you convey your meaning to him?

Bishop Sumi: Yeah.

Student E: Yeah? [laughter]

Bishop Sumi: I already explained.

Student E: Can you—can you convey enlightenment then? Can you give—can you give him your meaning of enlightenment?

Bishop Sumi: Oh, this is another question like... [extended laughter]. It’s okay?

Student E: Little bit[?]. [laughter].

Bishop Sumi: If you concerning only enlightenment, it must be free of everything. Isn't it?

SR: [Laughs] did you understand? [Laughter.]

Student E: I got the meaning.

SR: [Laughs] very good!

Student F: How many different types of Zen Buddhists are there?

SR: How many different schools?

Student F: Yes.

Bishop Sumi: Fifty-three schools Japan. Each school has sect. It must be organization, you know. According to famous[?] it must be organized. Not only Buddhism. First time start one unique Zen gather[?] and it became—so we needed some school and sect, it must be organization....

Student F: What are these schools?

Bishop Sumi: ...on the way to development. You know, one ??? [Aside] excuse me? You know, in the sutra is one explanation like this: Buddha himself explained one word, but they are many disciple. They accept by his knowledge, and his experience—through his experience—each different explanation[?] must be right, you think so? So, one word—only one word Buddha speak, but disciple accept as he like it or not. This is the same meaning. Organization must be some—something “fitable” for you. But it's not fit to me. You like, I dislike, like that. Everything must be. So how choose? What point we standing, like Reverend Suzuki explained. So Zen is the same. But they are needed some organization. It must be development as a school.

Student G: [Mostly inaudible with traffic noise) have a relationship with ???. What part does it play ??? having a religious experience[?]?

SR: Pardon me?

Student G: I said what does it mean, idea[?] today you were talking about ??? having religious experience. And I was wondering what exactly is meant by that, and what value will we have in religious life ??? Or how does it ??? your life ???

SR: I couldn't—I cannot hear you.

Student G: What do you mean when you say one has a religious experience, and what...

SR: Can you ???

Student H: Religious

SR: Religious experience? You can...

Student G: And what—what part does this fulfil in a person's life?

SR: [Aside] excuse me.

Student I: What does it mean to have religious experience? What part does that play in one's life?

SR: Religious experience, oh. What part?

Student J: Yeah, it’s not religious ??? [laughter] Like we don't have a religious experience now ??? [laughter]

Student G: I mean some people seem to, you know, have apparently no need for religious faith or experience, and others do. And what is religious experience actually?

SR: Hmm. No [laughs] Bishop Sumi?[?]

Bishop Sumi: I would say, life itself is mostly ironical, you see? That the meaning faith to religion, it's the direct way to entering one gate. Mostly the gate is all—always opening. But one could enter. How he want to—willing to it—this is a very serious viewpoint for religion. You can't understand Japanese poem? Door always open, but who enter in? If you willing to enter, or not, it's the important point, extremely important point. Someone called it's religious or not—it's the problem of yourself, no? Your problem is always your problem—it's not mine [laughs]. You must resolve yourself this point. It's our Zen way. So, sound of Zen meaning oneness include everything. So, but when asserted[?]— chosen—what is ritual for me or not. It need[?] with my intellectual part or practical part, it's the same needed. Generally, it will be knowledge itself come outside, but wisdom must be arisen from in the heart of my—our—through some experience, or understanding, or realization. This is a separate point, religious or not, isn't it?

World is very difficult to explain, so that point—so, it's not openly we must discuss to face to face. Sometimes need is some explanation, but sometimes need no was[?] one word. Yesterday one gentleman come to my temple and asked me "What is satori?" —that person said [laughs] enlightenment. He'd read many koan problem, but he don't understand satori itself. He only guess intellectual, through the novel or the—some sutra. But it is not real. His intellectual point must be profound[?], but his daily life never changed.

It used to say our knowledge in the human life, or theoretical world, already brought out the earth, and our knowledge reached the moon-world—some spacemen walking on maneuver the space world. But once we developed our surrounding position, there—is there many happiness ways[?] or happiness worlds same time arise in me? No, more and more fear or suffering arising surrounding us. What is it? We must push[?] with, right with this point. What is real or not? It not—your own question, religious or not?

It's very, very—always we are running the circle, sure? The starting point is not different, that is. Zen itself must be concerning our daily life, not only idealistic.

Oh, excuse me, Reverend Suzuki [laughs]. Please give question, to Reverend Suzuki [laughter]. A long time waiting.

SR: Yeah, I've waited for a long time [laughter].

Student K: I have a question, to the question you answered before. You said that we must have organization. And yet American experience is that organization has cut off the search. So, the question is, what rules must we apply to organization... in order to keep—in order to keep going?

Bishop Sumi: (aside) Please, Reverend Suzuki answer this, okay? [laughter]

SR: What rules?

Student K: Yeah. In other words, if you say we must have organizations, then how—what principles must we—must we apply in building the organization so that it does not become rigid?

SR: Our organization, you mean, or various schools' organization?

Student K: Yes. Americans think ???—I'm thinking more of the American situation, where, you know, Americans say, we must have organization, and we have lots of organizations [laughter], but no growth.

SR: No growth.

Student L: Remember when you were talking about the Christian church, and you said that perhaps it's just ethics, because its dogma cannot be—because you have to follow this dogma so closely? Well, that's the extreme of organization. Where—where is the point where, where it—where …

SR: How point?

Student L: Where is the balance between organization and still...

SR: Organization and teaching?

Student L: Well in …

SR: Around[?] around[?]—between?

Student L: between organizations still having the fluid[?]—still having the spirit of Buddhism? Not letting it deteriorate into a bunch of rules and...

SR: [Asides in Japanese?] I have ???

Bishop Sumi: The Buddhist—Buddhism organization, you don't—you don’t know, not yet? Oh, sorry, you must study more and learn that[?] [laughter].

Student M: Does Zen include everything?

Bishop Sumi: Yeah, mostly said[?]…

Student M: Does Zen change anything?

Bishop Sumi: Pardon?

Student M: Yet, does Zen change anything?

Bishop Sumi: I couldn't hear.

Student M: Does Zen change anything? Is gain[?] still seeing[?] [laughter]

Bishop Sumi: Oh, your mean—you mean the physical or mental?

Student M: Both.

Bishop Sumi: Both. It needed more study both sides [laughter]. Then you can realizing how you want [laughter].

Student M: How does it work ??? [laughter].

Bishop Sumi: Please continue more [laughter]. Never stop, never, okay.

Student N: I understood yesterday that Buddha nature pervades all, therefore you can't kill, is this right? I mean you can actually not kill anything, because—well if that's true, then do the Buddhists have a particular idea of re-incarnation? What is it? Re-incarnation - do you believe in it?

SR: Yeah, most of them believe it.

Student N: In what form?

SR: What for?

Student N: How does it occur, the re-incarnation? I mean do they have past lives that they can remember?

SR: Uh-huh.

Student N: Oh [laughter]

SR: No, no.

Student N: No?

SR: No, we cannot. I don't, at least [laughs, laughter].

Student N: Then they—they don't believe in re-incarnation, is that right?

SR: Yeah, that's, you know, somewhat scientific, you know, not curiosity, but maybe research[?]. This kind of, you know, understanding is—this kind of—this kind of understanding of religion is more—rather scientists who have. For—for us, those problem is not so serious problem, you know. For an instance, we do not talk about "Before this earth" like this, "What was here? Or what was there? What changed into this earth?" or "What will become of this earth?" This kind of research or question—the question which scientific mind will have, you know—to answer those questions is not our—is not our point. And actually, that is—that is just your intellectual, you know, request, or intellectual project.

Student N: Then...

SR: As soon as we start to talk about organization, we will have this kind of problem, you know. "What is the teaching? What is your rules?" [Laughter, laughs.] But we—we do not want those rules, you know. Actually, we do not have that such kind of rules: "As a Buddhist you have to believe in re-incarnation." [Laughs] we don't—we have no such rules. But Buddhist—most Buddhist believe in re-incarnation, I think. I am not so sure. This kind of rules is not fundamental rules, and as a, you know—as Zen—for our sect, the most important thing is the system of the teaching—our system of teaching.

Student O: Isn't your system an organization? ??? part of an organization?

SR: Organization is to—will be just to help us[?] operate those system of teaching. It is exactly the same as Zen Center, you know. Zen Center helps to operate our teaching. You know, this is—this is our organization.

Student P: You mean it isn't necessarry to ring the bell at a certain time? But it is, for functional purposes?

SR: That is—that kind of, you know, rituals and forms is set up already, and we are observing it—the same way, wherever you go. Even you go to China we can—you will understand what does the gong mean, and you can do it, as you do in Japan. If you understand—if you can practice zazen here, you will have not much difficulty. You have, but [laughs] it—it will help you, you know, at least, because we have same rules and rituals. This is very important, you know, this kind of thing.

Student P: Supposing I can't hear?

SR: Hm?

Student P: Supposing I am deaf?

SR: You are deaf? No, no problem, even though. It is not so, you know. There are many deaf teachers, you know, masters.

Student P: But I won't be able to hear the bell though.

SR: Hm?

Student P: I won't be able to hear the bell, or the teaching.

SR: So, it does not[?]—everyone goes, so you can follow [laughter].

Student Q: But how does the teaching—I mean how does—how does the bell help?

SR: Yeah, yeah. That's too—too much [laughs].

Student Q: That's too much, yeah.

SR: That's too much to answer for me just now, you know. Anyway, you have no problem [laughter].

Of course, you—I think you have no such—I mean I don't want to say tradition but, you know, you have no experience of living in certain tradition. It helps us very much, you know, in some way.

Student R: Reverend Suzuki, what does it mean to free of everything?

SR: Free?

Student R: ??? to be free of everything.

Students (speaking together): To be free.

SR: Free? To be free.

Student R: The mind does not stick[?]...

SR: Stick, oh.

Student R: ... free of everything.

SR: Free everyone.

Student R: Free of everything, to not get caught.

Student S: Reverend Suzuki, I made a mistake. He said, freed of everything and I thought he said free[?].

SR: Ah, freed. Oh, free of everything, yeah [laughter]. Free of everything. Oh, I’m not teaching ???.

Student T: That's—that’s a good question also: how can you be free of everything, and still carry out your responsibilities moment by moment?

SR: You are doing it, actually [laughter].

Student U: Is she free?

SR: Yeah, you are free—of everything [laughter, laughs]. You—you say you are not free on purpose [laughs]. You—if you are not free of everything you cannot live. As long as you live, you are free of everything.

Student V: What's living?

SR: That is living.

Student V: What is being free of everything?

SR: That’s—that is how to live [laughter].

Student V: What is living, though?

SR: Everyone is living in that way. So, if you realize it, you have no suffering.

Student W: Reverend Suzuki, would you explain ???

SR: Activity?

Students: Passivity.

SR: Passivity—passivity, oh—passivity. I seldom use the word passivity. That's too, you know, too—that word [asides in Japanese] too negative expression. Activity[?] is—when you react better, when you want to react better, passivity won’t[?] do[?]. When you—when you are always aggressive, you know, you cannot react. You will not be alert enough[?] react. Reaction—so—so that you can react alert and you can be more positive, you should be passive, and alert, and calm.

Student W: It's not blind meditation?

SR: Hmm?

Student W: It isn't blind meditation?

SR: No, no.

Student W: How do you become positive ???

SR: How? Oh, you are positive [laughs]. By nature we are very, very, very positive. And when you are being[?] - just positive. When you are left—just positive way, you know, you will not respond to your surroundings so well, because your life will be one-sided. It is like if you—it is like a ??? ship, on which many people ride, and these people ride one-side only [laughs], the ship will be [laughs] turned over. So, balance this boat…

Student: Are those people free?

SR: But…

Student: Are those people free?

SR: Huh?

Student: Are those people free if they are one-sided?

SR: You are not free if you are one-sided.

Student: Well, you just said that we're all free—you said I'm free, and she's free.

SR: Um hmm.

Student: Well, supposing I’m one-sided.

SR: Oh, yeah, you are one-sided [laughter].

Student: Then I'm not free, apparently.

SR: Oh, you are too free [laughter, laughs].

Student: I'm over the edge.

SR: Hmm?

Student: I'm over the edge.

SR: Yeah, you are on the edge. Be careful [laughs, laughter].

Student X: Reverend Suzuki, today when Bishop Sumi went around with his stick, I'm sure you all noticed that he hit people two times on each shoulder, whereas you usually do one time on each shoulder, but occasionally two times on one and one time on the other [laughter]. Is there any symbolic significance to this, or is it a matter of what maybe monastery you come from, or is there any deep meaning in this?

SR: I don't know. Deep meaning is in it [laughter]. Deeper than we—than we can talk [laughter].

Bishop Sumi: You feel some are strict[?]?

Student X: Is there a difference in two times and one time?

Bishop Sumi: Both is okay [laughter]. It's not wrong. That's all are really[?] [laughter].

Student X: It has no symbolic significance?

Bishop Sumi: Sometimes it's symbolic, sometimes emphasizing or stressing encouragement. How you accept it, only nervous, strictly. No.

Student: Would it be any more symbolic if you hit me five times?

Bishop Sumi: If you like it, I will do it [laughter]. Oh, basically we beat thirty times.

Student: How many?

Bishop Sumi: Thirty times, as a punishment.

Student: As a punishment?

Bishop Sumi: So we have many black spot on the shoulder [laughter]. I didn't aware like that, when I very young age, elementary school, mostly inspection for health. I don’t like that black point. Doctor surprised, "Why temple boys so have many black spot on the shoulder?" Every morning I accept hitting three—thirty times usually. So term[?] sometime—sometimes cry, and but never stop its beating going on. So, my knowledge of childhood, sometimes we used like this [moves away from mic] when we come back the temple we [laughter] but sound must be changed, so master know well what's inside. He grabbed me [laughter] and it's added thirty times more [laughter]. Sixty or ninety times beating [gasps] never never losing. So why don't you feel only one time or twice—two times? No [laughter].
Sometime we use the, you know, Japanese socks, tabi. It's a hitter like a nail combined with. It's hit inside the flesh! We used it, so I must cry and cry, but beating is going on [laughter]. It's so much we struggle, in the mind, and outside is severe hardness, always struggle with. So, at last my tear dry up –it couldn’t be[?]—it couldn't cry. But it's a nice memory to me [laughter]. Very, very emphasized and distressed to me, after my master died. I don't know why my master did like that, but after his passing away, gradually I growing older, I can face many troubles surrounding us. I—many, many long memory point during my child age. My master hit me so severe. It's something like my answer a question, why twice or one time you beat?

According to my—to our growing responsibility not to others, we do more responsible to each other, and for all society, and the nation ???, not only to me. Responsibility is mostly needed. It—many problem must be realizing—realistic—to result, there's no time to concern to others. When our—we—we are young, my father and mother covered, but other ones' social life, responsibility directly belong to me, or to you. So,, we must decide directly, not to other. In that case, what do you think of? So, it's very needed to resolve ourselves when we're facing very serious problem. When willing—are willing sometimes—like that point sometimes confused, sometimes confront, but it is my responsibility, or not? So this hard practice, you feeling particularly most the hard work[?], but after deep[?] training, how you can feel? I did. It's not a real joy? This is the experience, a very nice experience.

So, each—encourage you, when you face some trouble, which to try[?]— to resolve yourself—not be on the others. Our future always facing, and we always standing, this one point. The way is always opening two sides. We are sometimes, "Which way we should go? Right way, left way? Then we can find a rule which… [Tape ends here]

_______________

Re-transcribed as verbatim by Peter Ford and Wendy Pirsig 10/2024 from audio file provided by Engage Wisdom and based on their transcript.

***
File name: 65-07-31: untitled (Verbatim) I'm not sure why there were an A an B marked down but they don't seem to exist so the C should be eliminated. Changed "exclusive patent" to "exclusive pattern[?]", "clacker" to "clapper" 10-31-2024 pf.

Audio & Other Files | Lecture Transcript List