This week, I have been giving an overview of the teachings. In some level, just an overview of Buddhist teaching, but maybe a little more specifically how I present it and what you'll find in this community.

And the Buddha, his first teaching was on the Middle Way. In his very first discourse, he gave to the small group of monks he had been practicing with before his awakening. He started by saying there are these two paths that seem to exist in the world, at least at that time in ancient India. There was the path of self-torture, which was favored by the serious ascetics and monastics of the day.

And then there was the practice of pleasure-seeking, which was the dominant tone of the lay world at the time, probably of all time. And so he said, I have discovered a middle way between these two extremes. And the middle way that he gave was the Noble Eightfold Path. And what's interesting is the Eightfold Path isn't exactly the middle point between those two things. It's not, I will torture my lower body and then I will give pleasure to my upper body, perfectly in balance.

Rather, the middle way is more a general principle that we can apply to our lives, to any given situation, and it essentially is the wise response to any given moment. Sometimes it works out that it is the middle point. With right effort, for example, the Buddha gives the example of holding a baby bird in your hands. If you hold it too tightly, you'll suffocate it. If you hold it too loose, it flies away.

So find that middle point. That's the middle way. On the other hand, if drinking 10 cocktails makes you drunk and zero cocktails leaves you anxious, the middle way is not five cocktails. The middle way is probably therapy or maybe meditation or something like that. So anyhow, what the Buddha said to these issue of the heart, of the soul, of well-being, of what this life is all about, how to really live a good life.

He said the middle way, the wise response to that question, is this noble aidful path. So what I wanted to look at a little bit more is how do we apply this middle way to the perspectives I've shared the last two days, where there is on one hand the sīla or ethics perspective, which says that harm is real, That what you do matters. That it matters that you treat yourself, others, and the world in a wholesome way.

And then there's also the insight or Vipassanā perspective that says it's all empty. That nothing is intrinsically good or bad. That well-being has nothing to do with conditions. That points us to go beneath the stories about the shame and the despair and the tragedy and the loss and the hurricanes and the fires. To see it's all just nature doing its nature thing.

So how do we apply the middle way? How do we hold what I do matters and it's all empty? One teacher I've come to really appreciate and have learned a lot from is Rob Burbea. And I was listening to a talk by him recently and he said, If a student doesn't know how to put down their emotions and not attend to them in any given moment, I'm not okay with that.

However, if they don't know how to pick them up and explore them in any given moment, I'm not okay with that either. That's such a beautiful way of putting it. He's essentially treating both of those as skills. There's the skill of saying, no, this isn't the time. Or this just isn't something that needs investigating. And then there's the skill of, wait a minute, this is important. I need to attend to this.

And so it's as if to say these two perspectives, the ethics perspective and the insight perspective, they are two skills. They are two different ways of looking, two different perspectives that lead to different ways of being and acting in the world. An example I sometimes give is that you could look at a wall and see that it's flat, or you could look at it and see that it's beige.

It's not that one of those two is a truer, more real perspective. It's just that, well, you could see it in terms of shape or in terms of color. Different vantage points. Both have their place. So what to say to the meditator's perspective who says, well, emptiness is the truer reality. Or to the activist's perspective that dismisses meditative practice because the world is burning. What I find is that when we dismiss the harm is real perspective, it generally leads to a lot of unnecessary suffering, whether overt or indirect.

There's often a lot of spiritual bypassing, which is essentially just not dealing with our emotional, psychological, relational wounds, which then spill out into all of our interactions and cause harm for other beings. In my estimations, basically every single scandal with a spiritual teacher has been because they've dismissed sīla. And they can say, oh, well, you know, they sit on their emptiness high horse and say, it's all empty anyway.

You know, but people are turned from practice. There are consequences. People are wounded. That's real. And when we dismiss the Vipassanā perspective, that it's all empty, well, this leads to a lot of unnecessary suffering as well. If we keep thinking the problem of our heart is out there somewhere, we're always going to suffer. You know, frantic, anxious, confused, angry, despairing. That's going to dominate our heart and mind.

And that too is going to spill out into our interactions and into our world. So either of these two ways of orienting, if we don't really take them on as trainings, as practices, as the Buddha encouraged us right there in his first teaching, suffering. Suffering is what results. So in the beginning, we take them on as two completely different trainings. We spend some time cultivating loving kindness, cultivating the precepts, generosity, really working with our integrity.

We spend some time in formal meditation practice, cultivating the Vipassanā perspective. And eventually, in a mature practitioner, they really start to synergize. One of my favorite quotes of all time from Nisargadatta Maharaj, he says, Love tells me I am everything. Wisdom tells me I am nothing. Between the two, my life flows.

Right there, that's the whole of the Dharma. On a practical level, let's say some affliction arises, some anxiety, some shame, that the first movement is always just relax and be aware. Well, this is here. Maybe sometimes we're practices really rolling along and we can just see the constructed nature of this feeling on a very deep level. And it's just so clearly empty and insubstantial. It's like, oh, there's obviously nothing to do.

It's just this thing. Sometimes it's not that strong and it's okay. Yeah. Relax and be aware. This is here. This is painful, but I see it. It's not me. It's just, it's nature doing its thing. And especially when it's a lower intensity, like a three out of 10, that's all that's needed. You just see it and it's not a problem. But if the affliction is, is reoccurring, you know, keeps coming up over and over.

For me, that's often a sign, okay, there's probably something here I should look at. Or if it's really quite intense, you know, a seven out of 10, it's okay. It's not actually serving me to just hold down this vipassanā perspective how can i ground myself right now how can i step out of the overwhelm a little bit and so we learn how to be flexible with our way of looking what is the way that will reduce suffering right now and onward into the future now if it's say that dharma is essentially a two-step process that's really what i just described right there step one you just radically be with what is you meet it this is what's happening the dharma the buddhist teachings are not a running away from reality they're a meeting of it so okay suffering is here pain is here burning is here chaos hardship corruption loss joy delight all it's here it's happening okay i see that i'm willing to meet the moment and then we expose all the little subtle or overt grasping and resisting, we layer on top of it.

Okay, that's here too. And so that's step one, you just meet the moment. Step two is the simple question, is there something to do? If so, do it. If not, abide peacefully. It's really that simple. We can make it so complex, but is there something to do? Do it. If not, abide peacefully. Even if something doesn't feel like a problem on a vipassanā level. My child is crying in pain.

It's just nature, just sound at the ear door. Well, you should probably attend to your child. That would be the appropriate thing to do. Maybe also the earth is crying. Maybe there's something appropriate there to attend to. Even if you have this deep peace in your heart, it's again, it's both trainings.

You don't have Dhamma without ethics and you don't have Dhamma without insight. You take either away and it's no longer Buddhism. Typically, when people aren't seeing the first way, the ethics isn't landing. It's okay. spend a year with mettā practice. Spend a year doing a lot of service work, practicing with the precepts. See if something shifts when they're not really getting the second way. Well, spend a year with their daily sitting practice.

Maybe go on a retreat. Really train yourself to see that it's not a problem. Some of you may have noticed who've been here for a while. Over the course of the year, I essentially just shift back and forth between more of the ethics perspective and more of the ultimate perspective. Just kind of weave this narrative. Okay, they're both, they both have their place. They're both important. So I think that that's enough for now.

This morning, if it feels appropriate to offer yourself some mettā or offer the world some mettā, this is a good thing to do. If it feels like the training of the day is just to cut through it, just say this is what it is, let go. That also is a good thing to do. Follow the intuition and we'll see you in a bit.