Thursday Evening, November 13, 1969
Tonight I am supposed to explain “form is emptiness, and emptiness is form.” Last
night, we came to the point to clarify especially “emptiness is form,” which is
rather difficult to make clear. But actually, emptiness is “big mind.” And big
mind as sky which doesn't contain air, empty sky. “Empty sky,” we say, and
when plants and everything grow into the sky, the sky doesn't care. The sky is
always ready to accept things in it.
Our mind should be like the sky, our big mind. We should accept things as it
is, and we should not discriminate things, as the sky doesn't discriminate things
in which many things exist. Various beings is quite free in the big sky. But
our mind is not so. “I like this. I don't like that. This is beautiful. But that
is not so beautiful. I like him, but I don't like him. I like this part of him,
but the other part is not so good.” In this way, our small mind always
discriminates things and sometimes rejects things. That is small mind. So, in
the realm of the small mind there are many objects, there are many beings, and those
beings exist as if they have self-nature, good nature or bad nature, a
beautiful nature or ugly mean nature.
In this way, even though Theravadan teaching accepts the teaching of
selflessness, their way is more like a small-minded way because they
acknowledge things, various beings which is not empty. When we say dharma,1 it includes our sense organs and mind. We have five sense organs and mind. That
is six. And sense objects, objects of thinking and objects of our sense organs.
And the world which sense organs and sense objects create—get with and create
some world of sight, world of sound, world of taste, world of feeling. In this
way, each sense organ has its own world.
The Theravadan canon acknowledges substantial things. They count seventy-five
dharmas. But that is not actually the dharma we say; that is actually the more
psychologically analyzed elements of being. Instead of self, Buddha's teaching
is the teaching of selflessness. Instead of saying self, they say five senses,
or five elements, or six elements, or six sense objects, or six worlds of each—for
each sense organ.
So, even though they do not say “self,” actually they acknowledge a self which
is as permanent as things—dharmas. The Hinayana teaching is, in one word, the
teaching of the existence of dharma and nonexistence of self. That is Hinayana
canon.
But actually, when they acknowledge an objective world of objective being, it
is the same thing as to acknowledge a self which is observing objects. Do you
understand this point? That to acknowledge a lamp means to acknowledge my mind
which is observing lamp. Moreover, when you think, “I am seeing, observing a
lamp,” as I said before, my mind, my eyes or my mind, or self of mine is
projected, and you are reflecting your past experience. You say, “I am
observing,” but actually I observed a lamp, and you are thinking about “I” who
is observing a lamp.
So, it is same thing as to acknowledge self. Especially when they say, “A lamp exists
like this,” it means I exist and I am observing a lamp. So they say, “teaching
of selflessness.” They never say “self.” But actually what they mean when they
say, “Here is a lamp,” is that they acknowledge a self which is existent and
which is permanent. This is their nature of canon, or weak point of canon, or
immaturity of understanding.
When we understand things in that way, it means that in our mind we have
various objects. As soon as you have some substantial idea of many things, you
start to discriminate, and you start to have some feeling of good or bad. So in
that way, we cannot actually obtain big mind which is empty, which is called
emptiness. No big mind actually exists as long as we understand an objective
world in that way. I mean a substantial way and attached to something
specially. That is the nature of the teaching: five skandhas are not empty,
five skandhas are existent. Five sense dhatus are existent, or eighteen dhatus are existent.2
The Prajnaparamita Sutra denies this thought. According to Mahayana, everything
is empty, not only self but also everything is empty. There is nothing which is
not empty. It means that in big mind we should include everything as our own
children, as our own family. In our family, they are all part of our parents.
And parents treat them as they treat their own hands and feet. Actually children
are part of parents. So in that sense when they love children, they have no
idea of loving children. But actually, they are loving. They have no idea of
parents. But that is parents. When they have no idea of children, they are
actually really parents. You know, if parents have some idea of parents
[laughs], they are not parents. For children, if they think, “I am a good boy,
good child of my father or mother,” he is not yet so good. When he thinks, “I
am a very bad boy, I don't have worth as a child of my parents,” he may be a
good child. So, when parents have no idea of parents, when children have no
idea of children, they are good parents and good children.
The same thing is true with dharma, with our everyday life. When you think, “I
am practicing zazen,” you are not actually practicing zazen [laughs]. Maybe
very painful zazen, or maybe very sleepy zazen— “Oh! It's terrible.” [Laughs.]
When you want to know what time it is, “ten more minutes [laughs], five more
minutes.” That is not zazen. When you don't know what you are doing, that is
true zazen.
The big mind is the same thing. When there is no idea of anything, that is big
mind, that is emptiness itself. Now, “form is emptiness” is all right. Forget
all about form and color. The form was not observed as some certain form. That
is emptiness.
Then “emptiness is form” is maybe the next problem, how we understand “emptiness
is form.” Maybe I already explained it right now. When everything is in a state
of emptiness, everything starts to appear in its true sense. Do you understand?
You know, when parents forget themselves, they are true parents. When emptiness
takes place, form appears in its true sense. That is “emptiness is form.”
If I explain it by our actual experience—if I explain it more maybe
psychologically or biologically, the word emptiness is actually directed to our
mind. It looks like—against the Theravadan canon—The Prajnaparamita Sutra puts
emphasis on no eyes, no ears, no nose, no mouth, no body, and no mind. They put
emphasis on the emptiness of things, but actually Mahayana teaching is directly—is
actually—puts more strength on emptiness of self. To realize or how to
experience emptiness of self is to practice zazen. And in actual everyday life
we experience oneness of objective and subjective world. When you attain
enlightenment it is like this [taps stick twice]. Figuratively speaking, our
zazen is like a chicken in its shell. When we are ready to come out, the mother
hen will peck it and help the chicken come out from the shell. That is enlightenment
experience.
So in your zazen, if your practice is full practice, it means that you are
ready to break the shell and jump out as a small chick [laughs]. At that time
there is no self. It looks like he is in a shell, but he is ready to break the
shell, and at that time, the mother hen will peck, peck. That is oneness of
your practice and enlightenment. Fffft! At that time there is no hen and no chick.
They are one. He is one with everything.
So, in emptiness everything exists—obtains the same world. If ten people are
practicing zazen, this world is each one of the ten students. Actually the
world of emptiness is one. It is one, but at the same time, that world of
emptiness could be thousands of peoples’ world, past and present and future.
That is “emptiness is form.” Emptiness is one big world which belongs to
everyone. When you forget yourself, you own the whole world as a small chick.
He is not a small chick anymore. Each one of them, if they are ten, each one of
the ten chicks has obtained the same world. They are enjoying their own world,
but the world they enjoy is one big world. That is what we mean by “emptiness
is form.” Mmm. Does it make some sense?
So, you see, when your zazen is very good, if a bird comes and sings, the world
of bird appears—endless world. Right now almost all the leaves are coming down,
but in September or the end of August when all the leaves are green, one or two
sick leaves may fall. We say, seeing one sick falling leaf, we know autumn is
all over. Sick small leaves are our big world. Autumn is all over. Or when one
bird sings in the mountains, we know the calmness of the mountain all the more.
You know, calmness is not a matter of sound; if the bird sings it should be
noisy [laughs], but because of the one bird we feel the complete calmness of
the whole mountain. When one bird enjoys whole world, that is complete
calmness, that is real calmness, that is real emptiness. And, that is real form
of form. When you think, “This is a bird. I am here,” or “This is just a sick
falling leaf,” that is not real falling leaves. That is the silt3 of
your thinking mind.
Oh, yeah, each year at this time of the year, many leaves fall down. “Oh, it is
troublesome to see it” [laughs]. If you feel that way, that is more Hinayana
way. Or, you attach to the idea of falling leaves because those falling leaves
are silt of your experience, not fresh vivid experience. That is, “emptiness is
form.” When form appears from emptiness, there is true form. The form we know
or we acknowledge as a result of thinking or silt of experience, that is not
true experience or that is not true form. So, first of all, we deny the silt of
experience, subject or object—objective world or subjective world. First of
all, we deny this kind of idea. And we come back to the more original, vivid
experience. And there we experience the emptiness and form too. At that time we
cannot say form or emptiness. Everything is both form and emptiness. So that is
why we say “emptiness is form.”
Okay? [Laughs.] Emptiness is form. It is very logical discernment, but it is
not just logical. It is more based on our actual experience of everyday life.
Not special teaching, but some teaching which could be approved—which could be
experienced by practice and through everyday life.
Hmm. [Laughs.] Okay? Did you figure out what I wanted to say? [Laughs.]
Student A: Roshi?
SR: Hai.
Student A: When you say “big mind” you seem to say big mind in the same way
that the Theravada says dharmas.
SR: No. When Theravada says dharmas, it is based on an idea of existence. That
is why Nagarjuna rejected that kind of thinking. Whatever statement it may be,
there are four statements. If there are no more than four statements, whatever
the statement may be or understanding may be, if it is based on the idea of
being or idea of nonbeing—this is a pair of opposites (being or nonbeing)—and it
is not right understanding.
As long as they acknowledge some substantial dharma, it means that they don't
acknowledge the big world of emptiness. They say our self-nature is empty, but
actually they acknowledge, they accept objective substantial dharmas. When they
accept objective, substantial dharma, they are already accepting the objective,
projected self, self out of self. It is not true self. Self you reflect on in
some experience. Actually, I attained enlightenment [laughs] on this point. My
first enlightenment was—did I tell you? [Laughs, laughter.] I shouldn't say so
because I am a Soto priest [laughs]. You know—
Student A: Tell us anyway. [Laughs, laughter.]
SR: Mmm? I had a very difficult time, you know—doshin—way-seeking mind. What is
way-seeking mind? To practice something without any gaining idea. We should not
practice our way for the sake of ourselves, for the sake of others, not for the
sake of Buddhism even. For the sake of practice, we should practice. That is a famous
statement—very impressive statement, isn't it? [Laughs.] Very encouraging. You
should practice true way, not even for the sake of Buddha. Not for the sake of others.
You should practice our way for sake of the— [Sentence not finished. Tape
turned over.]
So I wanted to practice our way for the sake of practice. I started the
practice. That practice was to get up thirty minutes earlier than other students.
I was in a dormitory at that time. And before they got up, I cleaned the restroom,
so that they would not notice me cleaning the restroom. But, as I was cleaning,
many things happened actually. I had many times some people coming to the restroom.
I saw many rooms lit up. “Oh, he may come. Because he [laughs] gets up, he will
come pretty soon.” So at first I escaped. I hid myself somewhere so that they would
not notice me. But, even while I'm hiding myself—funny feeling [laughs]. I
didn't know what kind of practice I am practicing [laughs], hiding myself from
people [laughs, laughter], so that they would not notice me. Very strange
feeling. If I was doing something good, there was no need to be afraid of
anything. But I was very afraid of people at that time. I couldn't solve this
problem. And, I didn't know whether I was practicing our practice for the sake
of practice. The conclusion was, anyway, this kind of practice cannot be real
practice. But, at the same time, I couldn't give up. I was rather obstinate. So
once I determined to do it, I had to do it.
But the practice I was practicing was very awkward. I didn't know what I was
doing. At that time, we had to take a unit of psychology. And Professor Iriya4 once told us that it is impossible to actualize your past experience again. If
you think about it, it is already not the actual experience you experienced.
And it is not the psychological state which you had. Those words struck me:
“Oh. I shouldn't think about my practice anymore. I shouldn't think about my state
of mind or my experience. I shouldn't criticize my experience. Maybe whatever
happened it doesn't matter. So if I do it because I have to do it, that's all. I
shouldn't say my practice is pure or impure, or for the sake of others or for
[laughs] sake of Buddha or sake of practice.”
That is a useless thing to think about, so I gave up thinking about my
practice.
After that I didn't mind [laughs]. Whoever came, I cleaned. “Just a moment, I'm
cleaning this place. So you should go that way. You should go to the other
restroom.” So, when you feel as if you are doing something, at the same time
you are accepting it. You project “you” outside of yourself, and you are
criticizing “you” which is outside of yourself. It is not true you. True you is
on your side always, which cannot be criticized [laughs]. It is foolish, to
criticize yourself. I had that kind of enlightenment at that time. [Claps hands
together.] “Okay!” [Laughs.]
That is exactly what Mahayana Buddhists started to think about. To name various
elements, eighteen5 or seventy-five,6 it is maybe a very
foolish thing. Whether that is empty or not empty [laughs] is very far away
from our actual life. And when you think in that way, you are involved in that
kind of thinking, far away from buddha-mind. Some more questions?
Student B: Then what is small mind used for?
SR: Small mind is mind which attaches to many things. Why you attach to things
is you have a kind of idea of the substantial—you acknowledge the substantial
element in things. Because you think, “Here is a cup,” you attach to it. But
actually, the cup is not independent—something which has its own self-nature.
Because you see the cup, the cup exists. If you don't see it, there is no cup.
Because cup exists, I exist here. That is the teaching of interdependence.
Because I exist, cup exists. Because cup exists, I exist. If I don't exist, cup
doesn't exist.
Student B: If you see the cup, but you don't say to yourself, “I see a cup”—if
you see the cup, but you don't attach any particular thing to it, like saying
it's a cup.
SR: No. It means that when I say, “I see a cup,” this cup is mine [pats self],
a part of me, a part of big self. Not something which exists outside of me. And
that “me” which is actually observing a cup is not the self which is projected somewhere,
and “I have a cup.” This self is a picture of true self or a picture of big mind
which includes everything. So we are always talking about a projected self as
if that kind of self exists. But it doesn't!
If I say whether I am doing right practice or not, that is a projected self
which can be criticized. But even if you criticize it, that is not myself
anymore. “I am here always [pats self], true self is always with me, and moment
after moment with me.” And I am completely involved in something which I am
doing right now. Our life is the continuity of this kind of life. I am here,
here, here. And in each moment we are including many things. That is true “I.”
But projected self or a self which is the object of thinking mind is not true
self.
What was your question, by the way [laughs]?
Student B: I asked you what was the use of the small mind.
SR: Small mind—use of?
Student B: Yeah, what is its—it's there, but you, of course, say it doesn't
exist.
SR: Small mind doesn't exist actually. It is the silt of thinking mind. Small mind
doesn't exist. You think as if it does. It is quite natural for us to think in
that way. But actually, if you think more, and if you want to do something as
Buddha told you, with that kind of mind you cannot do anything. A projected
mind doesn't work at all. It will always create many troubles [laughs] because
it is a dead one, it is not an active one. And moreover, it changes like a
ghost. True self, when it changes, there must be some reason. But without any
reason, if someone criticizes this [taps on something like a water pitcher]
projected self, you think as if you did a very bad thing. If you think, “I did
a very nasty thing. Why did you get up so early and clean the restroom? You
nasty fellow [laughs],” you may say. You yourself will criticize you. That
“you” is not here, not me, but there—the self which you think was there two, three
days ago [laughs]. It doesn't mean anything. That is why we have to live in
each moment. It means don't criticize your projected self. A self it might be
in the future; a self it was in the past. But that kind of self doesn't exist.
At least it is useless. No end in treating that kind of self.
Student B: Roshi, is it possible to criticize yourself in the present?
SR: No.
Student B: It doesn't seem like it wouldn't [?].
SR: Criticize yourself? Whether you are fully occupied or involved in what you
are doing or not would be the point. Dogen says you shouldn't talk about the
teaching being lofty or being not so lofty. You shouldn't say so. But you
should know whether your practice is true practice or not.
Student C: So if our practice is lazy practice, then we should just let it be
lazy. I was thinking that it is lazy, so we shouldn't try to practice hard
because that's then projecting something. That's wrong understanding to be
practicing hard.
SR: [Laughs.] You can say so by words [laughs]. Why you have lazy practice is because
just half of you is working or something, and half of it belongs to the past or
somewhere else. You are not actually here, and you are not actually doing lazy
things. When you are lazy, when you feel very sleepy, at the same moment, “I
must stay in bed. Why am I so sleepy?” In this way, your self will be projected
in various ways. That is why we become lazy. So, the best way is to get up as
soon as you hear the bell [laughs], before you think anything. That is the
practice. We are always involved in thinking mind.
Student C: But suppose we just don't get up to the bell. Should we say to
ourselves, “I should get up for the bell” or just not do anything at all but
just stay in bed? [Laughter.]
SR: You see, there is an interesting argument [laughs, laughter]. When you hear
the bell, that moment includes your past and future. And the next moment
includes its own past and future. So, the moment you get up has its own future.
Zendo belongs to that moment. And washing your face, also included at that
moment, has its own past and future. There is no experience or no activity
which has no past or future. It belongs to each moment. Maybe you can call it
intuition because there is no time even to think about it. It appears in that
way. Because I explain it by words I have to say its own past or future. But
intuitively, you appear in the empty world in that way. That is your own
emptiness.
So what is bad? That which we cannot do is bad. What is good? Something which
you want to do, it is good. That is why Dogen said so. At that moment
intuitively we know that. You think there are many things to say, but the world
you have before you think is the actual world which you should strive for. Hai.
Student D: Did you say that the cup is a projection of self? Is that a
projection of the small mind?
SR: Not a real projection. It is something which arises in relation to the
objective being. The more you think, you may lose the point. [Laughs.] In one
word, your thinking is involved in, based on, the idea of being. That is the
trouble. You are caught by the illusion or shadow of being. That is the trouble.
Because you think something exists here in this way, that is the idea of being.
The opposite background of thinking is non-being. Just to think whether a lamp
exists here or does not exist here. When we say “nothingness,” you may think
the opposite of being. No such thing as a lamp exists. That is the opposite of
thinking of being. Being or non-being. There is no complete idea of being or
complete idea of non-being. Nothing arises from nothingness. Nothing vanishes
into non-being. I don't know why, but when we think, we think in that way. Hai.
Student B: When the breath goes out, and we count “one,” and then “two,” are we
attaching to breathing?
SR: No. No. No. Watching.
Student B: Oh yeah, by watching it, creating an object, thinking mind seeing
something happening—
SR: No.
Student B: —breathing happening.
SR: No. Moment after moment, that is the subtle distinction between real
breathing, counting-breath practice, and not true one. You don't count just to
know how many, you know [laughs, laughter].
Student B: Couldn't handle it [?].
SR: Huh?
Student B: We stopped at ten and go back to one.
SR: Yeah.
Student B: But what is it that perceives a breath going out to call it “number
one, number two,” and so forth.
SR: We choose the simplest activity—about which we don't think. It is another
practice of following-breathing practice. The point is not to count, but not to
wander with your practice.
Student B: If you don't make—can you get mechanical that way, like just “one”
[2-3 words]?
SR: Not mechanical, you know. My understanding of mechanic is just to do, just
to work, just to count to ten. And something which produces ten somethings, ten
breaths, that is a more mechanical way. And without using much body or mind,
you can produce something. That is mechanism.
When you count your breathing, it is very simple to count from one to ten, but on
each breath all of your mind and body should participate. With the whole body
and mind you take one breath. And instead of saying something else you say,
“one, two.” See? That is practice.
Student B: Thank you, Roshi.
Student F: Roshi, when you're sitting counting your breathing like that, and
you're involved in saying “one” and following your breath out, it seems like
there's a kind of split of one part of you or you being involved in the
following of the breathing—
SR: Oh. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Student F: —and another part on another side was something being aware of the
whole action taking place, of being aware of your concentration on following,
and another that seems to be aware that's not even involved in it but aware of
it taking place.
SR: Yeah. Aware of—I don't know what you mean by “aware of,” but—
Student F: Well, you're following your breath, and are you counting as you're
breathing, and say you're very carefully trying to follow your breathing, and
yet at the same time you're aware of all of it taking place. You're aware of
your action, aware of your counting your “one,” your “two.” Seems like there's
a split.
SR: No.
Student G: One part observes the other.
Student F: One part is observing. You're doing this action—or it not just
observing but just aware that it's taking place—
SR: Oh, I see.
You are watching yourself. Oh, that is not the way. When you count, some
element of watching yourself is involved. Because if you go, “twenty” or
“thirty,” “Oh my!” [Laughs.] That much observation is involved. But I don't
mean on each breath you should be very careful. Instead of being careful about
what you are doing, you should take your breaths with your whole body and mind.
Then you have no time to watch.
It is the same thing as when you make calligraphy or penmanship. Maybe you're
watching so that your penmanship doesn't go outside of your line [laughs]. To not
go outside of your line, you are making a best effort. And that is not you
observing it. Why you think in that way is maybe, the zazen practice looks too
easy, so you have time to think about it [laughs]. But even when you are doing a
very simple easy thing, you should be able to do it as if you are doing a very
difficult thing. And, at the same time, so that you can do a difficult thing as
if you are doing a very easy thing, we should practice zazen. Do you understand
the point?
A cat, a tiger for instance, uses its whole attention and whole strength even
when he catches a small fish. Ffft! [Laughs.] His attitude is the same as to
catch a big animal. The tiger has no fear. Even if he catches a big animal, he
can do it as if he catches a small fish. Even when he is catching a small fish,
his way is the same way as when he catches a big animal. How he could do so is
the point.
Usually human beings—if it is easy, that is quite easy: “Maybe I can do it
tomorrow” [laughs]. That is our way mostly. “Oh, this is quite easy.” And your
attitude is quite different from when you do something difficult. That kind of
person has a big difficulty when he confronts great difficulty. Someone who
looks very bold and very strong is not actually so strong when he confronts some
big enemy or big difficulty. He will be the first one who may run away
[laughs].
If someone does small things with—not “care”—but we say, suki no nai.7 Suki no nai means—I don't know what. If this cup has some leakage, it is suki aru.8 Suki no nai is “no gap,” or “no chance to
take advantage of.” If a young beautiful lady wants to protect herself from a wolf
with black hair, long and short [laughs], the way is not to shout or to run
away, but we say suki no nai taido.9 Suki no nai taido.
She behaves quite naturally and beautifully, maybe sometimes charming [laughs],
but she doesn't give any chance to be taken advantage of. That is suki no
nai.
Zazen practice is something like that. [Laughs.] Even if you are always making a
face, [laughs] it doesn't protect you from cats and dogs [laughs]. Even though
you are quite natural and charming enough, but—“Oh my!” [laughs], they will run
away, if they have some ambition.
That is what is told in the Lotus Sutra. Even if you meet a big snake, the
snake cannot bite you. If you are going to be cut by a big sword by a black-masked
bandit, the sword will be broken piece by piece. That is, you know, suki no
nai.
So, zazen practice is always figuratively—
[End of original tape. It sounded like the last sentence was not finished on
tape.]
_______________
1 Suzuki pronounced it more like “dhamma” (the Pali form)
throughout, but the Sanskrit “dharma” is used here for the sake of
consistency.
2 dhātu (San., Pāli): region, realm, element. The 18 dhātus are the physical and/or mental elements that determine all mental processes
(e.g., organ of sight, mind-consciousness, etc.). The five dhātus Suzuki-rōshi referred to may be the five skandhas.
3 Suzuki-rōshi pronounced "silt" very clearly here and
later in the lecture. If he had looked up the word in a dictionary before the
lecture, as he often did, he would have found a definition like: "a
sediment consisting of very fine particles."
4 Professor Yoshitaka Iriya, an authority in Tang colloquial
language. One of the authors (with Sasaki and Fraser) of A Man of Zen: The
Recorded Sayings of Layman P'ang. (1971); author of Rinzairoku (1989); Gensha kōroku (Comprehensive Record of Xuansha) (1987–1989),
Zengo jiten (1991), and other works. He was director of research for the
First Zen Institute of America in Japan, and he contributed significantly to
the research for Zen Dust (p. xxi). Suzuki-rōshi also talks about Prof.
Iriya in Lecture SR-67-09-08B.
5 The 18 dhātus.
6 Possibly the 75 Sarvāstavādan dharmas, which constitute the
final, indivisible, real units of existence.
7 suki no nai (Jap.): suki = opening; unguarded
moment, flaw, space, or room; no = of; nai = no. Hence, to be
always on alert; to be thoroughly guarded. See also SR-71-03-02 for a similar
term.
8 aru (Jap.): some, certain.
9 taido (Jap.): attitude.
Source: City Center original tape transcribed verbatim by Diana Bartle and
checked against tape by Bill Redican (7/31/01). Lightly edited for readability
by Wendy Pirsig, Peter Ford and David Chadwick (2/2021).
Audio & Other Files | Verbatim Transcript | Back to top of page