Dharma Talk, August 20, 2012: No State of Mind

Download: http://www.riversidechan.org/lectures/Dharma_Talk_20120820.mp3

This class is a little bit of a repeat or rehash of things but also a test to see where you're at. I'm going to read you a part of Master Hong-zhi's Cultivating the Mind Field. This particular passage is kind of where we're at in terms of the teaching. I want to see how you handle this. The passage goes this way so listen carefully because I'm going to ask you what this passage means.
Patched-robed monks should wither away and freeze the deluded thoughts of the mind and rest from the remnant conditioning. Single-mindedly, restore and cultivate this field. Directly cut down all overgrown grass throughout the boundary of the four directions. Do not allow a single speck of dust to defile this field.
Spiritually potent, it is bright and vast and unmoved. It is transparent. Thoroughly illumed that which comes before the principal essence; until you reach a state where the light becomes naked and pure, or not a single speck of dust can be attached to.

Overall, what is he talking about, what was he saying here?

Student: He's talking about living in pure mind and cutting off any kind of outward weeds of vexation.

Gilbert: Okay, what is he saying to cut off?

Student: The thinking mind; the thought.

Gilbert: You think it's the thinking mind that he's trying to cut off? What are you using in this moment?

Student: He's probably trying to cut off the ego behind the thinking mind.

Gilbert: Okay, all right. Now this ego behind the thinking mind, how does that manifest?

Student: As grass and weeds that grow up to make this spotless land impure.

Gilbert: Does a single blade of grass make a lawn?

Student: No.

Gilbert: How about if I showed you another single blade of grass, would that make a lawn?

Student: No.

Gilbert: And another?

Student: You're getting there.

Gilbert: Okay, so each single blade of grass would not make a lawn. If one was to have a single attaching thought, would that make an ego?

Student: It could be the start of an ego.

Gilbert: Ahh!!! It could be the start of an ego but as itself as we look at it and we say the proverbial Krispy Kreme donut (attach or not attached to it) that little moment of thought (17 thought units), would that create an ego?

Student: Only if those blades of grass are allowed to grow.

Gilbert: Even if you make the Krispy Kreme donut 2000 feet high, would that make an ego? Does anybody know what my point is? 405

Student: The 30 or 2000-foot high Krispy Kreme donut will not make an ego until you attach to it.

Gilbert: Who's the "you" that's attaching to it? Where did that one come from?

Student: Until one attaches to it.

Gilbert: Ehhh!!! Anybody else?

Student: That's the one thought that distinguishes another. That's enough right there.

Gilbert: Enough for what?

Student: That's enough for the magician's handkerchief right there.

Gilbert: But if you have a thought, an attaching thought, what is that attaching thought made of?

Student: Mind; self.

Gilbert: Nobody knows the tune I'm playing. There's no ego; there is no self. There's just causes and conditions; cause and effect, cause and effect. That's all that's happening. There is no bogeyman. There's no "you." There is no "you." "You" don't exist. Whether you think you exist illusory or not, we already got rid of and isolated out the self, right? Now we have to isolate out and remove the self from the entire equation even if it's an illusory self, there is no illusory self. There is no self there.

What happened with cause and effect? Krispy Kreme donut, mind attaches to that because of cause and effect. It is that when we run a series of these, it becomes an appearance that there is a self but there is no self. It's fragments of attaching, fragments of attaching. And you break it down; you cut it there and you can't break it down and have the self appearing there. It's just something that attach to that particular phenomena that arose in the mind. There is no illusory self.

When we understand that and that's why everybody wants to put down the self; they want to put down the illusory self. It's really nonsense because it's just simply that they lack the Right View to be able to see that there is nothing there. Like the blade of grass cannot be called a lawn. No matter how many single blades of grass it is, it's a concept. A single blade of grass is a concept; the other part is a concept as well. They are all constructed but when you break it down to individual blades that have no cohesiveness (even if they're illusory cohesiveness), there is no self.

And as one slows the film down frame by frame, the motion stops. You see the motion stops as if somebody is frozen in one spot. And you're able to see and breakdown the fact that whatever arose in mind is something that the next frame will show an attachment to it. The first one shows the Krispy Kreme donut; the next one will show this transparent attachment. It does not have your name on it; it doesn't have your name on it at all - even if it's an illusory name.

So when we see it in this way, we're clear about it. Why is this important what were doing? Because when we practice meditation, we become aware that whatever phenomena arises in mind, whatever appearances, whatever sensations, whatever movement of the mind, they're all from cause-and-effect and they don't mean that somebody is thinking. Even an illusory person thinking, there's no illusory person thinking. It's just cause and effect. As you see this, then you understand that.

 Let me read you something and hopefully this will work here -- to thoroughly confuse you. (Laughs) Reading from the Lankavatara Sutra: Let me see if I can find it. It's talking about whether the Vijnana, this thinking aspect is something that's there. Essentially what it's saying is the Alaya consciousness and the Vijnana, they're not separate things. What happens is that the idea of a self doesn't cease to exist. If the self or the mind itself would cease to exist, that would mean the Alaya consciousness would also cease to exist but it doesn't cease to exist, the Alaya being the seed or the root consciousness.

But what it's saying is that what ceases to exist is the seed- producing effect of the mind, that which when the Krispy Kreme donut arises in mind, the next frame is attachment to it either whether it's right or wrong, good or bad. It moves towards it. The mind appears to move towards it but only because of cause and effect. If one is to have eaten the Krispy Kreme donut and like something sweet, the next thought after seeing the impression of the Krispy Kreme donut whether seeing it on a billboard or seeing it within the mind, would be "I like; I want," because it's there.

But if one had eaten a whole box of Krispy Kreme doughnuts and gotten sick on them, the next thought would be "I dislike." Why, because of cause and effect; cause and effect. There's no "you" there. If the "you" was there, it would remain constant and it would always be there and could never go away but it's because of the constant, we call perfuming of the Alayavijnana consciousness where one is having thoughts produced by cause and effect. So as something appears, something else attaches to it. Neither good nor bad; there's no good or bad. It just simply is the way the mind works.

And when one sees that, and no longer engages in the seed- producing activity of likes and dislikes when one is recognizing it, then one becomes aware that there is no self there. If we slow the movie reel down so slow we can see frame-by-frame, what's appearing in mind? First, we see the Krispy Kreme donut, then we see a like or dislike to it; that was the next step. The next frame would most likely be what after that one liked the donut; the desire and attachment to it. And then the volition; I want to go buy one. I want to eat one because that's the way it goes.

I was talking about this in Toronto about a month ago. I was talking about Krispy Kreme donut or their version of them. I forgot the name of their version of them. It was Tim Horton donuts. One night I was hungry and I went out on the town. I couldn't find anything to eat but lo and behold, they have their donut shop there and I ate one of their donuts. And I'll never eat another one of them again. (laughs) It could put you into a diabetic coma just handling them. (more laughs)

So it's very interesting because it was like cause and effect - I like, I eat, I dislike. So it's very, very funny you know; there is no like and dislike. If Gilbert existed, he'd always like the doughnuts no matter what but I don't like them. So now if I see them, I understand them; neither like nor dislike but I know that's not something that will particularly like to partake in. Now, the Newport donuts down where I surf in, well that's a different story. That's for another lifetime to conquer.

But in any case, now you're getting an idea little bit what I was saying. The single blade of grass doesn't make the lawn. That's an upside-down thinking when we begin to look at things in this way where we think "Oh, this is a continuum of self." So we put this all together, these aggregate called the Five Skandas: form, sensation, perception, volition and consciousness; and we create an illusory self which is not really there.

And although it's not really there, and even the idea of discarding the illusory self, we don't even have to discard the illusory self. We just simply have to understand how mind works. If we don't buy into it, then that's fine. When you're sitting to meditate, when the thoughts arise, you let them go. When there is a movement towards something that reaches out to get something, you let them go. Now you're able to perceive that something has gone towards it.

Your initial comment Stan, you're saying that we have to let go of thinking. Thinking happens all the time like Hui-neng was talking about; he thinks all the time. He has hundreds of thoughts. He doesn't cut them off. What he's cutting off is the attachment to the thought. So what is thinking?

Student: (inaudible)

Gilbert: No, that's appearing. What is thinking? Mind. Even the attachments that come up in the mind are mind. It is just mind. It's just mind working. Somewhere along the line we got the idea of adding this illusory self which is totally nonexistent. But the difference is very critical in terms of when you're sitting to meditate - that one does not have to stop process of thinking. The mind naturally thinks. We don't have to cut it off.

So many people sit there - "I've got to stop thinking. I have to stop my scattered mind from thinking." And it's not that way. We just simply have to understand how mind works and the mind will come to a stop instantly; instantly - sudden enlightenment. It will come to a stop. Does it come to a stop? No, it doesn't come to a stop. Not in the way we think. The mind continues to go. The only difference is that it knows clearly. Mind is clearly aware of what is there; clearly. It doesn't have to worry about that.

So as we look at this, let's read some more. We're going to go back to what was said here:

        Patched-robed monks should wither away and free the deluded thoughts of mind. How does one wither away and freeze the deluded thoughts of mind?

        Student: By not attaching to them; by letting them go.

        Gilbert: So one is simply not adhering to thought; not apprehending thoughts. This is essentially the heartwood of what the Buddha taught - was don't attach. So he says freeze the deluded thoughts of mind and rest from remnant conditioning. Remnant is like left over conditioning. Like the echo; echo-echo-echo-echo-- But on the last you go "echo!" then it'll echo-echo-echo-echo again. But if you let that echo die out on its own, there's nothing there. You heard me talk about this many times. You just have to try to understand. Those last little echo-echo is remnant conditioning - the leftovers of the big one.

        So when somebody slapped you in the face, you're going to feel that and you're going to be angry about it. You're going to be shocked or confused. That's very strong and it's going to keep coming up. But if you let it lie, that's remnant conditioning. It will be finished.

        Single mindedly, restore and cultivate this field. The single-mindedness here is just simply allowing the mind to rest and being clear about mind and how it functions and its substance. We know the substance of mind is what? Mind; the substance of mind is mind. The pressure is off. Where are these thoughts going to go to? They're naturally appearing there. Let them appear. No problem.

        Directly cut down all the overgrown grass throughout the boundary in the four directions. Here again the cutting down is not aggressively meditating but resting the mind in mind, in wisdom, allowing wisdom to cut through the grasses. We don't need to physically do it or banish the thoughts from mind; just simply let the mind rest.

        Do not let a single speck of dust to defile this field. Spiritually potent, it is bright, vast and removed. It is transparent. Mind is transparent. Why, the substance of mind is mind. Whatever you see is mind. When you look at it and go, "Where is the mind?" There; it is right there but you can't see it. You'll never be able to see it because there's no illusory "you" to see anything. But that does not mean that there is not a thought.

        Thoroughly illumined which comes before the principal essence. What is being said here; thoroughly illumined what comes before the principal essence? What is being illuminated?

        Student: Mind.

        Gilbert: Yes, but what part of mind? (Now we're going back the other way.) Phenomena. Phenomena is not separate from mind but if one illuminates it via wisdom, it is mind. If one does not illuminated it, it's the illusory self looking at something and creating the idea of dualism. But when the mind is illuminated, there is no dualism. It's like you turn on the light in the room and it illuminates the entire room. That's what wisdom does; it illuminates it and it looks around the room and says, "mind." Not my mind; mind.

        Until you reach a state where the light becomes naked and pure. Again naked and pureness is the idea of Upeka or the idea of equanimity. Naked meaning that there's nothing there to see. If you see a Krispy Kreme donut stripped of all of its desire or repulsion. It's just there and you see it naked. You don't see it with all of the little sprinkles on it or whatever titillates your senses: chocolate or Bavarian cream. So it is just naked. It's just "okay I see it; it's there."

        But there's no "I see it really;" there's non-dualism. It's just appearing - mind is clear and all that is appearing in mind. So that's why the master would say to the student, "I don't see you." There is no "I" to see you. It's appearing in mind. It does it mean that the master's eyes are closed. Quite to the contrary, is the reverse - it's the student's eyes that are closed. It's the master's eyes that are open by negating the idea of an individual life in being, a personality, or an ego. It's merely mind.

        Where not a single speck of dust can attach to it. The speck of dust here again is not the statue without the fig leaf on it. Why do you have to put a fig leaf on the statue to make it clean and undefiled? It is not attaching; the attachment is the defilement that we have. Any question so far? No question, alright--

        Let me read you something from the book The Zen Baggage by Bill Porter. He is also known as Red Pine. Very good and interesting book; there's some parts in it that were interesting. This one he is talking to one monk, an Abbot of the Temple. This particular monk is actually Shao-lin and his Shao-lin Kung-fu is very good, very highly regarded. He had a chance to talk to Bill Porter. He was going around to different places and asking how the Temples are run in China. So they got around talking and let me read a little bit here. This is Bill Porter speaking:

        So I asked Yen-ying if the monks who were using the new hall for the first time approach their practice any differently and if they talk to their instructions more about their states of mind.

          He laughed, "You can't talk about state of mind!"

        First of all, why can't you talk about state of mind?

        Student: If you do, you're attaching to it.

        Gilbert: You're attaching to a state of mind. Okay; and there is no one to attach to a state of mind so reverse what you just said and you got it. There's no one attaching to that state of mind. There is no one there remember? That's just a single blade of grass. Whatever that state of mind is, it's just that moment of cause and effect.

        He continues: You cannot talk about state of mind. States of mind are delusions. Zen is about being free of delusions. States of mind are delusions. What are you, confused or delusional? You don't know if you're thinking properly or not.

        Sometimes people don't think very well. I had a client today somewhat particularly a problematic client, an elderly Mexican lady I would call a drama queen. She would be really good on the Novelas. In any case, some persons took advantage of her so she called Adult Protective Services. When she called Adult Protective Services, she was totally not aware of what's happening and who she was talking to and what you say to them and what she should not.

        So they asked her "what would you do if the people don't pay you your money?"

        And she said "I would probably kill myself."

        Bad thing-- do you know what happened to her next? They locked her up for three days and then they told her "we can let you out or you can sign this paper; you can stay here for seven days. If you don't sign the paper you can stay here for a lot longer." Who knows, maybe or maybe not; so she signed the papers. So she was in there for a week.

        Why, because she was delusional. She had no idea; she wasn't oriented to what was happening in that moment who she was talking to. And you know what I told her? "You deserved that because you were so dramatic; you weren't aware of what you were doing. You didn't see clearly what was happening and that's what happened to you!" And you know her friend just nodded her head and said, "Yeah, she deserved that!" It is because she knew how she was.

        So the thing is that I'm not making fun of her. What I'm saying is that "we all do that!" We all screw it up somewhere along the line and say something or do something that we shouldn't do. And so when you're there, you have to be very careful of what you say and what you do. If you don't, you can mess things up big time really and end up being a guest of the state for a while. So if someone asks "Are you crazy?" Don't say "Uh-huh." (laughs)

        Anyway let's continue on:

        People read books and analyze their meaning and develop all sorts of ideas about state of mind. But state of mind is a delusion. Zen isn't analysis. If someone at Shao-lin asked about their state of mind, they're more likely to get a beating than an answer.

        Right? --or be locked up-- What's your state of mind? I'll kill myself - suicidal. It was written on there -- suicidal. So we have to be mindful of our state of mind. Mindful meaning that we understand causes and conditions - why that is appearing in mind. It's not really a state of mind; it is just causes and conditions flowing by. If we attach to it, we create this delusion which is a state of mind which we call our happy self or our unhappy self depending on what we do.

        And we're really good at that. We're really a neutral self; we're mostly "I'm a happy self," "I'm a sad self" and we attach it to everything we have. "A Krispy Kreme donut; hurray I'm happy. It's gone, I ate it, I'm sad." Continuing on:

        Zen isn't something you study. It's not something you analyze. We tell the monks here not to make Zen into another delusion; not to make the Buddha into another delusion; to wake up their mind - their original mind; their mind free of delusion, including the delusion of mind.

        So this is what sometimes I'll say, "just mind, no mind, or no no-mind" and they all make sense. From where you're at, you may saying that's nonsense but it's perfect in its way that it makes sense in terms of mind, it's just mind, is just mind we're using, it's no mind, not my mind, your mind. It's just in mind, it negates mind. It negates delusion and no no-mind saying.

        It negates all of that including negating mind or negating delusion. It just like "why just let the mind work the way it naturally is?" That's the way it comes out of the box. Have you ever gotten something from out-of-the-box and tweaked on it and screwed it up? (laughs) (Let the record reflect that most people were nodding) I mean really; "hey, I can make this faster, I can make it louder, I can make it better." Whatever it is, and then you go "shoot, I should have just left it the way it was; naturally!" So that can happen. We just let the mind rest.

        We have a little bit of time left. What I'm going to read to you now is a letter that was written to the Second Patriarch, Hui-ko by this layman Neng-shang. They say that they believe that the layman Neng-shang actually turned out to be the Third Patriarch Seng-tsan. The date of the letter and the exchange with Hui-ko which was the second patriarch is around circa 550 to 551 A.D. So Shang wrote this:

        Our body creates a shadow and our voice produces an echo. And yet people exhaust their body to chase the shadow without realizing their shadow comes from their body.

        Have you ever walked down the street on a sunny day and your shadow walked in front of you, completely separate from you? No, the shadow is attached to the feet, right? There was no time that it left you. It's not possible, right? But we look at things this way you know. Kevin's kind of laughing about it now but I mean this is what it is - without realizing that their shadow comes from their body.

        What shadows are we talking about? Phenomena, thinking; the body is mind but the shadow is also part of mind. And it's part of the body because without the body, the shadow would not exist but the mind enables the shadow to exist. So which one is the true self? --trick Chan question.

        Student: Neither one.

        Gilbert: Nope! Again, which one is the true self, anybody?

        Student: Both.

        Gilbert: Both, they're not separable, right? Are you fudging your answer now? You better give her the microphone so we get a clear record here.

        Student: I say both including all because whatever ground it's reflecting to, it is as it is.

        Gilbert: Yes, the phenomena and noumenon are together. Whatever the shadow is, it's not separate from the body and the point here is all these things are just mind. I can give partial credit for no mind.

        Student; I'm saying that even the shadow or the screen in the background is also as it is in the condition that we're in.

        Gilbert: That's right; the conditions whether good or bad are not separate from mind. There's no defilement there. They appear exactly in accordance with the condition that preceded them to give the effect that's presently appearing in mind. Those things are not separable. We know that even the illusory notion of the illusory self is part of mind. It can't be other than that but it does not necessarily make it real apart from mind. Back to Shang:

        And people raise their voice to stop its echo unaware that the echo comes from their voice.

        Remember, I talked about echo-echo-echo-echo for probably three classes and here, he's saying about echo. People raise their voice, "I want to become enlightened; enlightened-enlightened-enlightened-enlightened!!! I want to stop thinking; thinking-thinking-thinking-thinking-thinking!!!" Where is that echo coming from? And they drive themselves crazy. Can an illusory person drive himself crazy?

        Getting rid of affliction to attain Nirvana is like trying to find ones shadow apart from the body and abandoning one's humanity to achieve Buddhahood is like stealing one's voice and listening for its echo.

        This listening for its echo is like, "You're doing a fine job Rick; you haven't had a thought for a long time." (laughs)

        Thus we know that delusion and awareness are the same and ignorance and wisdom aren't different.

        What the heck! There we go. He's saying that delusion and awareness are the same and ignorance and wisdom aren't different but only from a particular side. From your side, it doesn't make sense. From an enlightened person's mind, it makes perfect sense because it's just mind.

        As we begin to move towards that idea of right view, the clarity of what this layperson Shang said, is perfect; absolutely perfect. Although some you who would read this is somebody who wasn't a practitioner would say, "This is nonsense; this doesn't make any sense at all!" Back to Shang:

        From what has no name, we make names and once we have names, right and wrong appear. From what has no principle, we make principles and once we have principles, arguments arise. Illusions aren't real, so who is right and who is wrong? Delusion aren't true, so are they empty or do they exist? I would know how to gain what cannot be gained and how to lose what cannot be lost.
          Unable to pay you a visit so I sent these thoughts and dare hope for a reply.

        Hui-ko's reply was very short he just said:

        I've read your words and they are true. Indistinct from the deepest truths, at first we mistake this magic gem as rubble. Then suddenly we see it as a jewel. Ignorance and wisdom are not different.  10,000 dharmas are simply so but for those who cling to a dualistic view, I take out my brush and write down these words: Don't see yourself as anything but a Buddha. Why search for a place where nothing at all remains?

He says don't see yourself as anything but a Buddha, why search for a place where nothing at all remains? - such as Nirvana. Nothing at all remains; he's saying when one tries to seek this emptiness where there's nothing. But this mind, this wondrous function of the mind enables us to be here in this present moment without the sense of self, with a sense of function, with a sense of purpose, with a sense of calmness and clarity.

This wisdom that permeates everything - until such time that wisdom itself no longer exists. It just simply functions naturally. This is what all of Dharma teachers or instructors a wish for their students.