[…] by actually imagining all of this stuff and this world, we actually gain experiential knowledge in this possibility, and it paves the ground for that kind of direct knowing to arise. [Unrecorded] They’re just arisings, you know, that’s nice. The opening passage of one of my favorite books … The head cook was stirring this […]

[…] you notice a shift has taken place. Where there was that feeling of aloneness and that fear of isolation, now there’s just a knowing. An immediate and direct knowing. A knowing that there is no separation and there is nothing to be separated. And that knowing finds expression as a symbol, the deep red flower, […]

[…] are active in you. And through that you will see—not even conceptually really—you will see directly—what you do to bring these difficult situations about. And from that direct knowing, your behavior will change quite naturally. And we don’t really have to understand it in the analytical sense, for these changes to come about. I mean, […]

[…] about here—you just know—and it’s a knowing which doesn’t depend on rational deduction, or inference or induction. Think there’s one more but I can’t remember—or analysis—it’s a direct knowing and there’s a connection that comes through that knowing. Recently there was this match at Wimbledon which it was eleven hours and the final set was— […]

[…] going into samsara. Without going anywhere, I arrive at buddhahood. I understand that no experience is good or bad. The difference between buddhas and ordinary beings is direct knowing. When I know directly exactly how mind is And the knowing is full and present, that is buddha. What one can do then can’t be described […]

[…] and it is just like, “Aachh.” [Makes panic sound] Okay? There’s a comment over here? No. Okay. Any other comments about … yes, Mary. Fire transforms into direct knowing Mary: Regarding fire, could you explain again the quality knowing. I understand, you know, the reaction and the others, but knowing. Letting you know the limits […]

[…] “Damn!” depending on where you are, but you can’t go back. That term is usually translated as realization. I don’t use that terminology. I translate it as direct knowing or direct awareness. And the reason I don’t translate it as realization, because we have this wonderful phrase realized being. Now, if we look in a […]

[…] of a metaphor, which we’ll go through. The next column is what kind of understanding or knowing arises. This is usually translated as realization, but it’s the direct knowing. And you’ll see that in the column after that, is what is abandoned. This is a mistranslation, in my view, of the term spang (pron. pong) […]

[…] stable ’cause they’re dependent on the movement of energy in the system. And then at a certain point there’s a direct experience and the system changes—that’s the direct knowing. And then eventually it’s just the way you are. And that’s what those four levels refer to. What I was talking about earlier is the multiplicity […]

[…] same experiences. It indicates that you’ve joined with the situation, and there’s a seeing or a knowing that has arisen. This knowing is not intellectual. It is direct knowing and this is how it manifests in the body, in emotions, and in the mind. Thank you Kim. Okay, anybody else? Kathy? Kathy: I felt squirmy […]

[…] that everything is non-existent, means that everything has to disappear. That’s how I know it. No, this is much more accessible than that. You come into this direct knowing, and even though things arise, you see very, very, directly that they are—to use the traditional metaphors, because they are totally appropriate— arising like reflections in […]

[…] way. Let me come back to your question. Control is an illusion Ken: When you open this way, bit by bit, you will have the opportunity for direct knowing. Then you have to learn to act on that direct knowing. Larry can we do a little pushing? So this is a tai chi exercise. You […]

[…] puts you directly in touch with the suffering that is present in the inequities that the culture itself creates. So one just says—this is wrong. That’s a direct knowing that comes through compassion. It’s not, or it doesn’t really come through insight. It’s because of the connection with suffering. Okay? One more question, then we’ll […]

[…] That’s going to key your own investigation, and again I encourage you not to analyze. The understanding that we develop, or uncover, in Buddhist practice is a direct knowing. It’s a direct knowing. It is not a deductive knowing, which is always a product of the intellect. You can’t trust it. Uchiyama Roshi talks about […]

[…] symbolic expression, in the dakinis and protectors. There’s awareness, which knows exactly what to do. It doesn’t depend on deduction or inference. There’s just that very, very, direct knowing that’s at the very heart of all of us. The two aims here: Good fortune: may the two aims come about naturally. The two aims are […]