TWO: In your opinion, what is the Dharma?
ONE: If you are looking for the Buddha - try the opposite direction. No, not there.... Nor there.... Nor there either.
TWO: Where then?
ONE: Not outside - inside!
TWO: Ass! Now you can answer my question.
ONE: Do you remember how the Zen Masters replied to such questions?
TWO: Held up their walking-stick, pointed to a tree or a pillar, or gave you a good kick in the pants.
ONE: Quite so.
TWO: We are not in ninth-century China; answer like a Christian.
ONE: The Gnostic scriptures of esoteric Christianity were burnt by the Gothic Fathers of the Church, whereby the religion taught by Jesus Himself rapidly came to an end.
TWO: Rapidly? Do not traces still remain?
ONE: Traces, yes. But I might get Padma Sambhava to answer you in Tibetan.
TWO: Good enough. Attaboy! But you needn't say everything twenty times over; even so it'll be long enough!
ONE: Quite. First statement:
'Inasmuch as from eternity there is nothing whatsoever to be practised, there is no need to fall under the sway of erroneous methods.'
TWO: Fine! Straight from the shoulder! That lets out almost everyone I know; they are all busy on doctrines and methods, systems, disciplines and what have you.
ONE: The temptation is too strong, but unfortunately by yielding to it they strengthen the very notion of which they are trying to rid themselves. The second statement:
'The non-created, self-radiant Wisdom here set forth ... is itself the perfect practice.'
TWO: Good. And promising. Which is...?
ONE: Patience, here it is. Third statement:
'There being no two such things as action and performer of action, if one seeks the performer of action and no performer of action be found anywhere, thereupon the goal of all fruit-obtaining is reached and also the final consummation itself.'
TWO: Admirable! That is to say, the only performer of action is action itself. But why does he need about forty words to say that when nine would suffice?
ONE: An English author would have needed a hundred and fifty thousand.
TWO: A book? You have taught me to prefer living nourishment that I can digest for myself.
ONE: Nevertheless if a bullet were small enough it would leave no trace. But the English word 'action' lacks an important precision, it can imply either that which is done, or the doing of it.
TWO: Are they not one?
ONE: In duality - no. The 'doing of it' is subjective and relatively real; 'that which is done' is objective and illusory.
TWO: And the former is what is meant?
ONE: Just as it is the realisation that is dynamic, rather than that which is realised. Fourth statement:
'There being no method whatsoever of obtaining the fruit, there is no need to fall under the sway of the dualities of accepting or rejecting this teaching.'
TWO: Clear and concise! Go on - it is fine....
ONE: That is the end; there is no more to be said.
TWO: That is ... all?
ONE: What more could be needed? Does it not say everything?
TWO: If one is ready - yes, perhaps.
ONE: We are so used to overeating ... I can add his colophon if you like?
TWO: I'd like to hear that.
ONE:
'Thereupon is attained the goal of the seeking, and also the end of the search itself. Then nothing more is there to be sought; nor is there need to seek anything.'
TWO: The same graceful charm and finality.
ONE: Are you satisfied?
TWO: You are right. I see that it should be enough. Indeed it is the Dharma. You have given me what I asked for.
ONE: Go for a walk, and let us hope you will come back awakened.
TWO: Perhaps that will be nearer, if any such event exists at all. But the fruit-bearing will be in its own good time, not in yours or mine.
ONE: The fruit-bearing is not in time. You have only to open your eyes.
TWO: No two things ... action and performer of action ... If one seeks ... and no performer of action to be found anywhere ... no ... performer ... anywhere ... just action itself.... Ha, ha, ha!
ONE: I wonder... Can he have understood? ...
