Good morning, this morning I'm going to talk on section 12, this is about the story of Dogon's Buddha nature, and this is one of the most popular koan in Zen. So I think this is a really interesting koan and also meaningful. Before I started to talk on Dogon's comment on this koan, I'd like to talk another version of the same kind of story.

[01:01]

There are many variations about this Buddha nature and Wu and Mu. This is not only Joshu. And after Joshu there are two or three important interpretations about this story of Buddha nature and Wu and Mu. So I'd like to talk from the early ones. The earliest story about Buddha nature and Wu and Mu is about Joshu's Dharma uncle. Joshu's teacher is Nansen. Nansen was the person who appeared in the story with Obaku, I talked yesterday. And they are disciples, Nansen was a disciple of Baso.

[02:03]

Baso has many dharmayas, said more than 80. And this person was one of them. His name is Kozen. Kozen Ikan. I'm not sure about Chinese pronunciation. It's said, his story is in the Keitoku Dento Roku, Volume 7. According to his life story, when he was 13 years old,

[03:04]

he was struck by lightning. When he was still young, he saw someone killed some animal. He didn't say what. And he couldn't stand to see the living being was killed. So he left home and he became a monk. So his motivation to become a monk is he didn't want like killing. That means I think he loved animals. And this is about dog, dog of Buddha nature. I think that is important point of this story. In this story, someone asked to Ikan, does a dog have Buddha nature or not? The very same question.

[04:07]

And Ikan said, yes or ooh. So first, Ikan said, ooh, the dog has a Buddha nature. So this dog is not maybe not a dog, but their dog. I think when they are talking, there is actually a dog there in front of them, I think. So whether this dog has Buddha nature or not. So it's not a matter of a dog in general. This particular dog, I think. So does the dog have Buddha nature or not? And certainly, you know, because Ikan loves animals, he said, yes, that dog has Buddha nature. Then the monk asked,

[05:11]

Master, do you have Buddha nature? The dog has Buddha nature, but do you have Buddha nature or not? Then Ikan said, I don't. He said, move. So the dog has Buddha nature, but the master said, I don't have Buddha nature. Then the monk says, all living beings have Buddha nature. That was what it said in the Parinibbana Sutra. Almost all Mahayana schools said all living beings have Buddha nature. Only you don't have Buddha nature. Then Ikan said, I am not one of all living beings.

[06:15]

He said, I am not one of all living beings. Then the monk said, if you are not a living being, are you a Buddha? So do you say you don't have Buddha nature because you are already Buddha or not? No, Buddha doesn't need Buddha nature. Then Ikan said, this is... He said, not I am, but he said, this is not a Buddha. That word is ware ga ai. And the word Ikan used for I is this. So this is not I. I think this is important point. It's not kind of ego.

[07:16]

But this one means this body and mind and five skandhas. This is not a Buddha. So he does not talk about a person, but about this life as a collection of five skandhas. He said, this is not a Buddha. So neither living beings nor Buddha. Basically as a Buddhist term, living beings mean who are transmigrating within samsara. And Buddha is enlightened and free to get out of samsara. So he said, he is neither living beings nor Buddha. That means he does not transmigrate within six realms as a living being. And yet he is not a Buddha out of samsara. Monk, ultimately, after all, ultimately, fat thing is this.

[08:24]

Then if it's neither living beings nor a Buddha, fat is it. So this question is not who fat are you or who you are, but fat is this, fat is this. Fat thing is this. The actual translation, fat thing is this. Then he can say, this is not a thing neither. This is not a thing. So it's not a living being, not a Buddha, and not a thing. Then monk asked again, can we see it and think of it? Then can we understand, see it and think of it and discuss about it? Then he can say, even though we think of it, we can't reach it.

[09:30]

We can think about it, but we can't reach it. Even though we discuss it, we cannot get it, we cannot grasp it. Therefore it is said incomprehensible or wondrous and unthinkable. The word is fukashigi. Fukashigi is not possible to think and discuss. So this is something we cannot, we can think as a concept, but we cannot really see it and grasp it as an object. That means who really this is, what this really is. In the conventional world, this five skandhas is named shohaku.

[10:31]

And I can give you many information about shohaku, like things written in my passport or things I can write in my resume. There are many information about this person. I was born in such and such place in Japan in such and such year. And I studied something and I graduated from such and such schools and I have been working here and there. All those stories or information I can present. But those are just information for this person, not this person itself. And I have some idea who I am. So I try to, I can try to explain who I am.

[11:33]

But these are still all information about this one, not this one itself. So, and when I don't talk with other people, I still, I can still think of who I am. So there's no subject, object and explanation or presenting the information. Still within myself, I have some kind of an image, self-image. Whether it's stupid or clever or great or terrible or whatever. I have something. But that is still, when I start to think about it or play with it, it's already become the object of my thinking, my consciousness. So it's, there's separation, already separation. The person who is thinking about the person itself and the information about that person

[12:39]

or image of that person. So, however, you know, we try to grasp this person as a kind of an object. No matter how many information we collect, you know, this person is still this side, not that side. All the information and self-image is that side. And I'm thinking or people consider who I am. So this person or this itself cannot be really graspable. Cannot be grasped. Cannot be, you know, pointed. You know, whatever we point, that is outside. So, this person itself is really ungraspable and unthinkable. Whatever we think about this person is information and object of this person.

[13:41]

Please. Can you just say the translation again? What does it mean, basically? Who is not. Kai is possible. Shi is to think. Gi is to discuss. So unthinkable and... can't be discussed. Anyway, this is the first story. Earliest story about the dog's buddha nature. And who and whom. So, this cause and effect concept. Dog has a buddha nature, but he doesn't have a buddha nature. It's really interesting to me. And next one is, of course, Joshu's. In the record of Joshu, record of sayings of Joshu,

[14:49]

I found three stories about buddha nature. And one of them is dog's buddha nature. And two of them are dog's buddha nature. And one of them is buddha nature of the... In this translation it said oak tree. But another translation is cypress. I don't know which is true. Anyway, so the story, there are many variations. And it's really interesting to take a close look at each one of them. Shows a slightly different perspective of buddha nature and who and whom. The first one is in this book, record of...

[15:51]

No, the title of the book is Zen Master Joshu or something. The conversation, section 132. If you find that book, that is page... There's no page... Page 100, maybe 99. The story is as follows. A monk asked, does a dog have a buddha nature or not? The master said, no. So, no. The monk said, above to all the buddhas. Above to all the buddhas, below to the crawling bugs. That means buddha is the highest being. And insects or bugs are lowest. So, including buddha and bugs, all have buddha nature.

[16:56]

That is what Mahayana Buddhism teaches. Why is it that the dog has not? Why only the dog has not the buddha nature? Then the master said, because he has the nature of karmic delusions. Because he has the nature of karmic delusions. Nature of karmic delusions is go-shiki-sho. Go-shiki-sho. Go is karma. And shiki is consciousness. And sho is nature. Often we use go-shiki or go-sho.

[18:02]

Go-shiki is karmic consciousness. And go-sho is karmic nature. As an opposition of busho, buddha nature. So these two are kind of opposite. Go-sho or go-shiki is a source of transmigration within samsara and creates suffering. As in the teaching of dependent origination, the ignorance and craving caused by ignorance is a source of our karma. So we create bad, twisted karma because of our ignorance of impermanence and egolessness. So we bring this being as me. And I think this is center of the world, most important thing.

[19:05]

And all other things are the materials I can use to make this person happy. That kind of attitude. And we grasp things we don't, we like. And when we encounter something we don't like, we try to, you know, push them away. That source is go-sho or karmic nature or go-shiki. Sawakiro expressed this as a thief nature. He said, you know, all living beings have buddha nature and at the same time have thief nature. That means whatever I want to get, to make my own possession. That is a thief nature. So we have both buddha nature and thief nature. And Sawakiro said, if we imitate buddha and practice zazen,

[20:12]

this being is entirely buddha nature. But if we imitate some, he used a name of Japanese famous thief, if we imitate that thief and did stealing, then we are completely 100% thief nature. So depending upon our activity, our actions, you know, we are 100% buddha nature and 100% thief nature. I think that is the very clear answer of this question of buddha nature and who and me. Anyway, here Joshu says buddha, not buddha, but dog. The dog has not buddha nature because he still has karmic nature. That's the end of the story.

[21:17]

It's very simple. Wait, I'm sorry. Can you say that last line again? Sorry, I missed it. I said, this is the end of the story. No, wait. What was that? Sir, you said dog has, dog does not have buddha nature. I'm sorry, my mind was crossed. I said, Joshu said dog doesn't have buddha nature because he has karmic nature. That's all. No questions, right? And the second story in the record of Joshu, that is number 305. A monk asked, does the oak tree or cypress tree,

[22:25]

the original word is Hakujushi in Japanese, have buddha nature or not? So the question is about a tree, not even an animal. Does a plant have buddha nature or not? The master said, it does. He said, ooh. In this case, Joshu said, the tree has buddha nature. About the dog, he said, no. But about tree, he said, yes. The monk said, when will it become buddha? When will the tree become buddha? If the tree, the oak tree has buddha nature, then sometime in the future, this tree must become a buddha. So when is this tree become a buddha? Is the question. Then Joshu said, when the sky falls to the ground.

[23:32]

The tree become a buddha when the sky falls to the ground. Then the monk said, when will the sky fall to the ground? Then master said, when the oak tree becomes buddha. This is really interesting. Funny conversation. But I think what Joshu mean is, you know that sky is already fallen to the ground. Sky, you know, next to the ground is already sky. So sky is already fall on the ground. That means the tree is already buddha. Not the matter of in the future. So this means buddha nature is not a possibility to become buddha in the future,

[24:37]

even though we are not buddha yet because we are deluded now. But the way, in this case, the oak tree or cypress tree is, is itself already buddha. The tree is live, you know, together with everything on the ground and sky, in the sky. So this is one thing, one entire network of interdependent origination. This itself is buddha. So the tree is already buddha. I think that is what this means. And next one, 363. This is again about the dog's buddha nature. A monk asked, does a dog have buddha nature or not?

[25:37]

The master said, the door of every house leads to the capital. The door of every house leads to the capital. This is a kind of proverb, same as, you know, all roads lead to Rome. And, pardon, capital, capital city, capital, capital city. And the name of the capital at the time in China was Chao'an, or Chang'an. And Chao'an literally means eternal peace. And that means nirvana. That means wherever we are, whatever condition or situation we are, the road is all road, street, all the street in front of our house leads to the capital or nirvana.

[26:44]

So whether we are a dog or human beings or a cat or plant or whatever, the road, all the road or street goes to the capital. So, you know, I think this means, you know, the condition we are and nirvana or liberation from samsara is connected. And yet we have to walk. That means we have to practice. And as Dogen then said, when he discussed, not discussed but explained, about the idea of practice and enlightenment are one, he expressed two ways, two different ways, I think.

[27:54]

One is, as he described Zazen in Jizyu Zanmai, breathing bend over. Then we sit, showing the Buddha mudra, that means throughout the body and mind, that means this upright posture, breathing through our nose deeply with abdomen and keep our eyes open and let go of whatever coming up from our consciousness. This is Buddha mudra. When we show, you know, this Buddha mudra, mudra means, mudra is like a logo. So when we show this, this is, has Buddha's logo. Then Dogen said, immediately when we showed the Buddha's logo,

[28:57]

with this body, throughout body and mind, this entire world becomes enlightenment. Right? At least Dogen said in Bendowa, if you agree it or not. So this means, when we sit, immediately enlightenment or nirvana is there. So there's no, it's not a matter of time. When we sit, nirvana is there. But when we practice, enlightenment is there. Without practice there's no such thing as enlightenment. So practice and enlightenment are identical. But he, I forget the name of the chapter, but he, another place he said, when we climb a mountain, you know, we leave our home and we continue to walk to the top of the mountains

[30:04]

and within this process the first step we get out from our home and the last step we reach the top of the mountain are the same step. In this case there's a process. And then we leave the house and then we reach the top of the mountain at different time. And yet he said these two are the same steps. It's not a matter of, you know, the final step to get to the top of the mountain is better than the first step. Without the first step it's not possible to reach the mountains. So this entire process of walking from our home to the capital or Chowan is itself, is process of so-called enlightenment or nirvana.

[31:12]

Or we say, you know, or Dogen said this is Buddha way. Buddha way is not only on the top of the mountains. But when we start to walk from the first step we are already there, within Buddha way. That is another meaning of practice and enlightenment or cause and result are one. When we take a first step, take a bow and start to practice we are already in the Buddha way. And yet we need to walk. Keep walking, keep practicing until we reach the top of the mountains. And in order to reach the top of the mountains it takes more than forever. So we just keep walking.

[32:15]

And yet when we start to walk we are already in the goal. That is Dogen Zenji's idea of practice and enlightenment are one. Anyway, so those three stories about Buddha nature and Wu and Mu in Joshu's record I think it is very interesting. Three different aspects of Buddha nature. One is, dog does not have Buddha nature because dog has karmic nature. And second, Joshu said the tree is already Buddha. Right now, right here. Because it is a part of this reality of all beings. And in the third story, and yet we have to walk to practice. So there are three different aspects.

[33:21]

And there is no theoretical explanation in Joshu's sayings. And so, these are the kind of material the masters in Song dynasty China used to make a koan, so-called koan. And there are two basic texts of koan we still study about dog's Buddha nature. And one is Shouyou Roku, or in English translation Book of Serenity. And this one, Book of Serenity, was made by Soto Zen Masters. The original collection of 100 koans.

[34:25]

And each, one verse or poems on each koan was made by Wanshi Shougaku. Wanshi Shougaku was Dogen's, let's see, Dogen Nojo Secho Chikan Sougaku, 4 or 5 generations before Dogen. Anyway, he lived about 100 years before Dogen. And Wanshi was very well known as a master and a poet. And Dogen very much respected Wanshi Zenji. And Wanshi collected 100 koan stories and composed a poem on each of the stories.

[35:31]

And later, another person whose name was Bansho Gyoshu. Bansho Gyoshu, he also belonged to Soto lineage. And he was a little older than Dogen, but almost contemporary. But because this person lived in the northern part of China. You know, at the time, China was kind of divided into Song China and a dynasty called Qin in Japanese. That was the dynasty of not Chinese, but I don't think Mongol, but some nation from the north part of China.

[36:36]

Occupied the northern part, northern half of China. And this person lived in that part. So, I don't think Dogen could read Shouyou Roku, even though they are contemporary. And in Soto tradition, we study koan using this book, Shouyou Roku, or Book of Serenity. And in Rinzai, they use Hekigan Roku, or Blue Crucifix Record, or Momonkan. Momonkan is gateless gate, or gateless barrier. So, Shouyou Roku, there's no case of Doge Buddha nature in Hekigan Roku, or Blue Crucifix Record. So, Doge Buddha nature is studied and practiced in Rinzai tradition based on Momonkan.

[37:45]

So, Momonkan and Shouyou Roku are two kind of different approach of these koans, and two different kind of style of practice. But, when I read Dogen's comment on this koan, I think Shouyou Roku and Dogen Zenji's interpretation is a little different. That's why I said two or three. Anyway, first I'd like to talk how this koan was used, or story, or these materials are used in Shouyou Roku and Momonkan. And, probably this afternoon, I'm going to talk on Dogen Zenji's interpretation. The main case of this, this is case 18 of Book of Serenity, page 76.

[38:59]

The main case is as follows. A monk asked, let me use Japanese pronunciation, a monk asked Joshua, does a dog have a Buddha nature or not? The question is the same. And, first Joshua said, ooh, or yes, yes, dog has a Buddha nature. Then the monk said, since it has, or if it has, if a dog has Buddha nature, why is it then in this skin bag? If dog has a Buddha nature, why, you know, this Buddha nature is within this skin bag means a karmic form of life. Why Buddha nature become a karmic being?

[40:03]

Then Joshua said, because he knows yet deliberately transgresses. Because he knows yet deliberately transgresses. That was Joshua's answer. This is the first half of the story. And another monk asked Joshua, does a dog have a Buddha nature or not? Joshua said, moo, or not. So first he said, ooh, and second he said, moo. The monk said, all sentient beings have Buddha nature. Why does a dog have none then? All living beings have Buddha nature. Why does a dog alone don't have Buddha nature? Then Joshua said, because he still has impulsive consciousness.

[41:10]

I don't like this translation, impulsive consciousness. The original word is saying of gosshiki, so karmic consciousness. So, second half of the story, a monk asked, does a dog have Buddha nature or not? Joshua said, no. And the monk asked again, why a dog doesn't have a Buddha nature? Then Joshua said, because a dog still has karmic consciousness. So, this second half is almost the same with the story in Joshuroku. But I don't know, I'm not sure where Guanxi found the first half. Probably he made it. You know, those stories are made up stories.

[42:19]

We don't need to believe this really happened. This story becomes more and more interesting and meaningful. In the beginning it's a simple story. But in the process people discuss about it. People made the story more interesting and more meaningful and more philosophical. So, this is one of the products by Zen masters using those materials from Kozen Ikkan or Three Conversations within Joshuroku. So, this is one text of this koan. First Joshua said, uu, and second Joshua said, mu. And Bansho Joshu made a commentary on this koan case.

[43:36]

I'd like to, maybe before that, better to introduce Guanxi's poem on this poem. Maybe better to first introduce his introduction. In the introduction Bansho says, A gourd, gourd, g-o-u-r-d, gourd, floating on the water, a gourd floating on the water, slash, push it down and in turns, a jewel in the sunlight. It has no definite shape. It cannot be attained by mindlessness nor known by mindfulness. Immeasurably great people are turned about in the stream of words.

[44:44]

Is there anyone who can escape? This is an introduction by Bansho Joshu about this koan. So, he's saying, you know, Buddha nature is like a gourd floating on the water. You know, if we push it, it turns, so it doesn't stay. So Joshua said, yes, there's another, that Buddha nature turns and shows the side of no, uu and mu. So, whichever we grasp, it turns around and different aspects appear. So, there's no way to grasp as a concept or words whether it's uu or mu. And it's also like a jewel in the sunlight.

[45:47]

I think a transparent jewel in the sun. Depending upon the condition of the light, the color changes. So, there's no fixed color or no fixed... So, depending upon the causes and conditions, it changes. And that is the understanding of this person, Bansho Joshu, about Buddha nature. It has no fixed self-nature. So, therefore, whether we push it, it turns. And depending upon the conditions, it changes. So, there's no way we can grasp in one way. And he said, it cannot be attained by mindlessness or mindfulness. Mindfulness is uu-shin and mu-shin.

[46:52]

Dogen used in Buddha nature. He said both uu-shin and mu-shin are living beings or sentient beings. So, this mu-shin is not, as I said, mu-shin does not mean lack of mind. But mu-shin is beyond thinking or not thinking. Uu-shin is thinking and mu-shin is not thinking. So, we cannot grasp the Buddha nature with thinking mind. And we cannot grasp the Buddha nature with not thinking mind. But there's no way we can grasp it. Because we are part of the Buddha nature. And it's always changing. It has no fixed self-nature. And Bansho's commentary on this koan is as follows.

[47:59]

If you say a dog's Buddha, I'm sorry, if you say a dog's Buddha nature surely exists, or uu, afterward he says no. If it surely does not exist, still previously he said yes, or uu. So, which is right? You know, I want to, or we want to make sure which is right. If both, if these two are contradicted, one can be right, but another cannot be right. Right or wrong. And we want to determine which is right and which is wrong. But Joshu said both. So, which is right, which is wrong. And if you say that to say yes or no is just a temporary response,

[49:04]

that means depending upon the person, Joshu, the questioner, Joshu said different answer. And if you say that to say yes or no is just a temporary response spoken according to the situation, in each there is some reason. That is why it is said that someone with clear eyes has no nest. Someone who has clear eyes has no nest, no nest means a place to stay. So, if we have clear eyes we have to always move, always change. Only, not only the Buddha nature, but we need to always change. There is no fixed place we can stay and observe things objectively and say yes or no, or who or more.

[50:10]

Buddha nature is living, so it's always changing. And not only Buddha nature, but the people, we are always also changing. So, everything is dynamic. It's not a matter of, you know, whether this is a black marker or not. This is a black marker and because I use this as a marker to write something on the whiteboard, but I am changing and also this is changing. This run out of ink, this is not a marker anymore. And I put this in a trash can, then this is not a marker. This is a trash. So, this is a black marker to me, at this moment, as a kind of nama rupa. Because I can use this as a marker.

[51:11]

And that's it. So there is no fixed nature as a black marker on this being. And yet, this doesn't mean this does not exist. It is a condition of this being. To be a black marker is a condition of this being, at this moment, in the relationship of this person who needs to write something. And that's it. That's all. But, you know, with our thinking mind, we grasp this as using our word and concept, then this is eternally a black marker. It doesn't change. The concept of black marker never changes. And yet, this being itself is a black marker only for a certain period of time. Because it's impermanent.

[52:13]

Let's see. Bansho continues. The point of this monk's question was to broaden his perspective and learning. So, the monk is within a process of learning. He didn't base it on his own fundamental endowment. Joshu said yes. Joshu said yes. Using poison, using poison to get rid of poison. So, this word, both yes and no, is a poison to use to get rid of poison. So, if we grasp and cling to yes or no, or who or me, it becomes poison. And if we know how to use it, the poison can be medicine to cure our sickness.

[53:28]

And using sickness to cure sickness. So, Joshu's yes or no, or who and me, both can be poison and also medicine, depending upon how we use it. Thank you. Well, I don't have much time. We go to Wanshi's verse. A Buddha's, I'm sorry, a dog's Buddha nature. This is a verse, a poem by Wanshi on this koan. A dog's Buddha nature exists, or u. A dog's Buddha nature does not exist, that is mu. Joshu said u and mu. First u and second mu.

[54:31]

Let me read the entire verse first. A dog's Buddha nature exists. A dog's Buddha nature does not exist. A straight hook basically seeks fish who turn away from life. Chasing the air, pursuing flagrants, clouds and water travelers. In noisy confusion, they make excuses and explanations. Making uneven presentation, he throws the shop wide open. Don't blame him for not being careful in the beginning. Pointing out the flaw, he takes away the jewel.

[55:39]

The king of Qin didn't know Liangshang u. I think we need an explanation about this poem. So Joshu said a dog's Buddha nature is u and mu. And Wanshi said this is like fishing with a straight hook. Usually the hook is curved, otherwise we cannot hook the fish. But Wanshi said Joshu is fishing with a straight hook. So he wants to fish only those who turn away from life. That means only the fish who want to throw their life away.

[56:44]

That means to leave from karmic nature. Wow. That means Joshu is trying to fish up the fish who want to come up from the samsara without being hooked. And chasing the air, pursuing fragrance. Clouds and water travelers. Clouds and water is Wensui. Wensui means monks traveling all over to find teachers. So they are chasing after the fragrance. Air and fragrance. Air is Qi. Qi or Qi. And fragrance of that Buddha nature.

[57:46]

You know, monks or way seekers are trying to find the Buddha nature. And chasing the fragrance, air and fragrance of that Buddha nature. So those monks were the fish who turn away from life. But in noisy confusion, they make excuses and explanations. That means they are involved in those philosophical questions and explanations. And he lose the real Buddha nature. They lost the sight of the real Buddha nature. Making uneven presentation, he throws the shop wide open. Even presentation means he...

[58:49]

This is Joshu. Joshu opened the store, opened the shop, and tried to sell the Buddha nature. And even presentation means Joshu presents both Wu and Mu. Wu Buddha nature and Mu Buddha nature equally. And he throws the shop wide open. So everyone is welcome. But one said, don't blame him for not being careful in the beginning. That means he, you know, put both Wu and Mu. And in this case, first Wu, and then Mu. And this first Wu is a kind of careless presentation. And so he make correction and again put Mu.

[59:53]

Pointing, the final two lines, pointing out the flaw, he takes away the jewel. That means first he offer the jewel, that means Wu Buddha nature. And next he take it out, take it back. And this, that is Mu Buddha nature. This, the king of Xin didn't know Liang Xingwu. It comes from a story in Chinese classic. Xin, the king of Xin was the first emperor who built the Great Wall in China. He was the king or emperor of really strong empire. And this person, Lin, in Japanese pronunciation, Lin Shoujo, was a minister of smaller country named Chao.

[61:04]

Chao wa Chou. And this Chou is same, Chou is Joshua. Anyway, so, and the king of Xin, emperor of Xin, knew that the king of Chao, or Chou, has a very precious jewel. So, and the king wanted to get it, want to get that precious jewel. And he asked the king of Chao, Chou, to exchange the jewel with, it said, 15 cities. So, Xin gave 15 cities and he wanted to get that jewel in exchange. And because, if reject, Xin, you know, conquer, come to fight and with power, it was taken.

[62:16]

So, even though he didn't, but the king of Chao said yes. But he wanted to make sure the 15 cities are surely, you know, given. So, he asked this minister to take the jewel. But if king of Xin, how can I say, seems not willing to give the 15 cities, then take the jewel back to the country. That was the mission of this person. So, first he presented the jewel to the king of Xin. And he found that when the king of Xin received the jewel,

[63:20]

he changed his mind not to give the 15 cities. So, this minister read the king's mind. So, he said, you know, there is a flower on the jewel, I'll show you. So, let me give it, I'll show you the flower. So, he get the jewel back and, in that story, he said, when he returned the jewel, he said, how can I say in English, it seems you are not willing to give the 15 cities to his king, his emperor.

[64:26]

So, if you, I will keep this until you really give the cities. Otherwise, I break this jewel with my head. He said his hair was like a snake. So, the king of Xin was kind of afraid of that anger, expressions. And he said, wait until I prepare to give the 15 cities. And, so you can keep it, the jewel for a while. And right after that he sent the jewel back to his own country. That's the story, anyway. That means first the jewel was given to the emperor of Xin and next it was taken away.

[65:34]

That is the point of this verse. So, this means first Joshu gave the jewel to the monk as a buddhanature. Here you are. And next he took it away. By saying, dog has no buddhanature. So, that is a point of the interpretation of this story of Joshu first said Mu and next said Mu. First present buddhanature as a kind of encouragement. And when the student becomes satisfied with that buddhanature, then Joshu took it away. And said, there's no such thing. So, in this interpretation, this is a kind of a step of education for a practitioner.

[66:44]

First encourage people, you know, we all have buddhanature. So, we need to practice. And if we practice, we will be able to become buddha. It's a kind of encouragement. And then, practitioner, you know, settle down and continue to practice. Now, the teacher takes it away. There's no such thing as buddhanature. But, just practice. So, this is a kind of two-step method. One, first give everything. Then, next take everything away. This is a interpretation of this story in Joshu-roku. That's how Joshu's koan of buddhanature, dog's buddhanature, has been understood. And in Rinzai tradition, they use mumonkan.

[67:49]

Here is mumonkan. Mumonkan was collected by Rinzai Zen master whose name was Mumon Eikai. And this person was also a little older than Dogen. But, he was born before Dogen and died after Dogen's death. So, this person lived longer than Dogen. And yet, they are contemporary. So, all three, Shoyo-roku, Mumonkan, and Dogen Zenji, are all about the same time. But, probably Dogen Zenji didn't read Mumonkan. So, those three are kind of all independent each other. And, you know, common understanding of Joshu's mu is based on this Mumonkan's interpretation.

[68:58]

So, this is most famous version. In this version, the story is very short. It said, a monk asked Joshu, Has a dog a buddhanature? Joshu answered, Mu. That's it. There is no second question and second answer. Has a dog a buddhanature? Question. And Joshu said, Mu. That's it. So, Mumon cut off the story into half and put only Mu. And he kind of ignored Joshu's response using U. So, only Mu. That is how this koan is used in Rinzai tradition as a koan.

[70:08]

And this koan is one of the first koans they used for when people start to koan practice. And students are asked to become one with Mu. So, Mu and U are cut off. And only Mu. And Mumon's commentary on this koan is something like that. Something as follows. As follows. In order to master Zen, or understand Zen, you must pass the barrier of the patriarchs. To attain this subtle realization,

[71:12]

you must completely cut off the way of thinking. You must completely cut off the way of thinking. So, Mu-shin is important. Not thinking. No thinking. Cut off the way of thinking and become one with Mu. If you do not pass the barrier and do not cut off the way of thinking, then you will be like a ghost. Ghost? Clinging to the bushes and weeds. So, don't think. Now, I want to ask you, what is the barrier of the patriarchs? Why it is this single word, Mu? Single word, Mu. So, it's not together with U. Single word, Mu. That is the front gate of Zen.

[72:18]

This Mu is the front gate. Front gate means main gate of Zen. Only Mu. Therefore, it is called the Mumonkan of Zen. Wazenshu Mumonkan. If you pass through it, you will not only see Joshu face to face, but you will also go hand in hand with the successive patriarchs. Entangling your eyebrows with theirs. Seeing with the same eyes. Hearing with the same ears. Isn't that a delightful prospect? Wouldn't you like to pass this barrier? So, if we go through that barrier of, dateless barrier of Mu,

[73:22]

then you can be really intimate or is one with all ancestors and Buddhas. And allows your entire body, allows your entire body with this 360 bones and joints and its 84,000 pores of the skin. Summon up a spirit of great doubt. So, in Mumonkan, this great doubt is important. And concentrate on this word, Mu. So, Mu is something we need to concentrate. So, object of meditation. Carry it continuously day and night. So, don't forget Mu all day.

[74:26]

Do not form a nihilistic conception of vacancy or a relative conception of has or has not. Has or has not means Mu and Mu. So, in this case, according to Mumon, this Mu has nothing to do with Wu. It should be, so in modern Rinzai tradition, this Mu is called Zettai Mu or absolute nothingness. It's not relative with Wu. And it will be just as if you swallow a red hot iron ball. Like a swallow red hot iron ball which you cannot speak out even if you try.

[75:32]

So, only swallow up the Mu. You cannot speak it out. This is the difference between this practice and Dogen's. Dogen also said, always said, we should swallow it up and we have to speak it out. That's the difference, I think, to me. All the illusory ideas and delusions, delusive thoughts, accumulated up to the present, will be exterminated. And when the time comes, when the time comes means not now, when the time comes, internal and external will be spontaneously united. So, if practice with this attitude, focusing on Mu, like a swallow and become one with Mu, then sometime in the future,

[76:34]

internal and external will be spontaneously united, become one piece. You will know this, but for yourself only, like a dumb man, dumb man, who has had a dream, a dumb person who cannot talk, has a dream, but there's no way to communicate with others. This experience of being united with internal and external is only your personal experience. You cannot share with others. Then, all of a sudden, an explosive conversion will occur, and you will astonish the heavens and shake the earth.

[77:34]

This is a teaching and practice in the Vinaya tradition about this koan of Mu. So, this and the Book of Serenity are very different. In the case of the Book of Serenity, this kind of duality is important, Wu and Mu together, in order to show the reality which is neither Wu nor Mu. So, the approach is really different. And, I think Dogen Zenji's interpretation on this koan I think is very unique, I think different from both Shobo Yoroku and Mumonkan.

[78:39]

That is what I'm going to talk about this afternoon. I think this Shobo Genzo Bussho is really difficult, but important and interesting. I think I should have divided not into two parts, but maybe at least 13. You know, it's too rich to talk even a half of it in five days. So, I don't think this is the last time to study this writing. Maybe later I'd like to study with the study group, not one-time retreat, but as an ongoing study group.

[79:41]

Anyway, any questions? No. Any questions? Please. Can you talk a little bit about Zetai-Nu? Zetai-Nu. Absolutely. Well, Zetai-Nu is used as a very basic concept of so-called philosophy, modern Japanese philosophy, often means Kyoto school. And the most famous philosopher of Kyoto school is Nishida Kitaro, or Kitaro Nishida, and he is a very close friend of D.T. Suzuki. And both, they were friends. Kitaro Nishida and D.T. Suzuki were friends since they were, I think,

[80:47]

middle school students. And they influenced each other. And Nishida became a scholar, philosopher, and D.T. Suzuki practiced Zen with Shaku Soen and came to this country. And Mr. Kitaro also practiced Rinzai Zen. And Nishida and his students, how can I say, considered this Zetai-Nu, absolutely Nu, beyond any duality, as a base of this entire world, as a space, their reality. And each and every being is a kind of a, how can I say,

[81:47]

I don't know the philosophical term, but Nu manifests itself as U, as many, many independent beings. Well, that's all I can say. Their philosophy is really kind of, it seems deep. And each person has different, slightly different idea. So, and I really didn't study philosophy in that way. So I can't explain more than this. Please. I think so.

[82:58]

And you said, the nature depends on actions. So, Shoshu is saying, well, several different directions occur to me. Because, of course, there's lots of things he could have been doing. There's putting that together with, oops, that was somebody else's. Ikan is not having Buddha nature. So this is, I'll try not to be confused. Yeah, there are so different short stories, so. Yeah. So, but after the Joshu story, you said, to imitate Buddha, you have 100% Buddha nature, to imitate a beast, you have 100% beast nature. So I thought, Shoshu is saying, right now, that dog is not acting like a Buddha.

[84:04]

And this is where I'm getting confused, because the other thing, when he says, when Ikan says, this, you know, this place is not a Buddha, and then Ikan's dog having Buddha nature, it just makes together two questions. And I'm more interested in Ikan's question. Should I skip the Joshu question and answer Ikan's question? One at a time. Okay. So that was it. Did I understand you about Joshu? I know it seems kind of simple. Is Joshu reading the dog's mind as to what the dog is doing, as to whether he has Buddha nature or not? Dog don't have a mind? No. How could Joshu say anything about whether the dog has Buddha nature,

[85:09]

based on Sawaki Roshi's discussion of, you know, sometimes there's 100% Buddha nature, sometimes there's 100% Buddha. Of course, Sawaki Roshi was later than Joshu, but you did connect those two. I think the point of this, these, you know, many slightly different variations, but the point of this discussion about dog's Buddha nature is, what is the life of bodhisattva, who has both karmic nature and karmic consciousness, and yet we have a plan to walk the Buddha way towards Buddhahood. What is this?

[86:10]

It's not about the dog in front of us, actually. Dog is this being. So even in the case of Kozen Ikan, first they discuss about Buddha nature of the dog, still that dog is Ikan himself. So same as, you know, whether, same as, you know, bodhisattva has Buddha nature. And then, that's why we allow body-mind and try to become Buddha. At least we try to practice and getting closer to Buddha, following Buddhist teachings. And yet, we still have a karmic nature, and we cannot completely like become Buddha. Then, what is this? Whether this is 100% Buddha nature or 100% faith nature.

[87:18]

When we honestly take a look within ourselves, we find a faith nature and also a karmic nature. And it's somehow, it's kind of strange, how, why we want to be released from that kind of nature. And that is, what is that? That energy. And, of course, in Mahayana Buddhism, that energy was called Buddha nature. Then, what's the relationship between this Buddha nature and karmic nature? It seems we are a mixture of these two, somehow. Are these two things or one thing? Or two sides of one thing? Or two names of one thing? What is this? It's actually, I think, a problem we are discussing. It's not about whether a dog or a cat or a bird has Buddha nature or not.

[88:24]

Other kind of animals, outside of ourselves. But the question is, why we have such a strange thing like a body-mind? You know, we are human beings, and that's enough. Why we don't like to be human? Want to be karmic consciousness. Somehow, so there's a kind of a contradiction. Our life as human beings is torn into two parts. And somehow these two are always, not always, but often, contradicted and fight against each other. I want to do what I want. And I want to be free from this wanting, this desire. What is this? I think it's a real question of all these stories. And my understanding is same as Dogen, because I'm a student of Dogen.

[89:30]

But point is, these two are, I think, two names of one thing. And that is what I'm going to talk in the afternoon. Just responding to what you said, that Buddha nature is kind of the answer to why we are satisfied just to be human. Why we want to be free. I thought, when I... I don't know if there's an experience which of course is an illusion, but in any way it's like glimpses of just being part of interdependent origination. And whenever I have one of those glimpses, it's like there's this huge relief. And the question comes up, why do I resist this? But somehow we resist it.

[90:32]

So the question comes up is this. Desire and resistance to go that way. Do you have something to... Ah. Using poison to kill the poison. I think that phrase appeared in the Shoryuroku, or Book of Serenity. And one of the points in that interpretation is Wu and Mu become words and concepts.

[91:35]

And people start to discuss and create a kind of philosophical system. And that is, if we use Wu and Mu in that way, that is a poison. And what Joshu did is using those Wu and Mu, which can be poison, to heal or cure the sickness caused by our grasping and thinking. Ah. I think that is what it means. Mind. To kill the mind. Yeah, thinking mind. Concept. Concept. Yeah. Using the concept word and the concept to kill the thinking mind. It's kind of a little more prosaic or relative level.

[92:36]

The beads that we carry represent what would have been about 780 illusions. And they relate to the precepts. We always say that we observe the precepts by breaking them. So when you see that you're breaking the precepts, it reminds you of the precepts. This is using a poison to cure the poison. How could your father not have the precepts without breaking them? I don't think there are any precepts without breaking them. Please. You talked about how Rinzai uses Koan. I'm wondering how, maybe Soto School is too broad, but anyways, how we could practice Koans when our practice is essentially Shikin-Zazen. Instead of taking the Koan into our sitting, how do you work with the Koan?

[93:39]

Well, we don't use Koan in our sitting. So Koan, any Koan, is not an object of our meditation. I don't think our Zazen is meditation. I don't think, because we don't meditate. We have no object. So, we don't use Koan in our Zazen meditation practice. But as Dogen used Koans, he collected 300 Koans, and studied, and write his own comments. That is the way he used Koan as a kind of a, I think same as the Sutras. The kind of a verbal expression of the reality to which Buddha awakened to. So, when we read Sutras, and when we read those Koan collections,

[94:48]

of course we need to use our thinking, and we don't think about Koan in our Zazen. If we think about Koan in our Zazen, that is not Zazen. But when we study, read books, and think, we just think. And what this means, from many different perspectives, as Dogen freely do, from this side, that side, that side, and this side. This is, in a sense, I think as I said before, this is the, how can I say, letting go of thought, using thought, and words, and letters, to, you know, when we read Dogen's, or not only Dogen, but something like Nagarjuna's, whatever understanding we have, they are negated.

[95:54]

So finally we can do is open our hand and surrender. And that is how we study the reality in which we are living, and deepen our understanding and practice. I think that is how we use these Koans as a Dogen student. So do we carry, you know, like we are looking at Joshu's dog, not in Zazen, but when we are walking up the hall, do we carry that question with us, or do we just, when we sit down to study, throw our attention on study, and then when we stop studying, we leave it? Well, you know, at least in my practice,

[97:03]

we cannot say in our practice, in my practice, to focus on one thing is dangerous. If you focus on one thing, you cannot see other things. This is what we generally say, when you drive a car, to focus on one particular thing, like a steering wheel, or brake, or acceleration, or anything outside, is dangerous. So, our mind is nowhere. And yet, because our mind is nowhere, our mind is everywhere. It's not occupied by a certain fixed thing. Then, you know, whatever necessity comes up, we can react. So, we generally say that when we drive a car with this attitude,

[98:09]

that means we don't focus on any particular thing, so therefore our mind is everywhere. And we are awake and alert. Then, at that time, we can say we concentrate on driving. So, at least in my practice, you know, when doing Genzo-e, and I need to talk about Shobo Genzo Bussho, I try to focus on this writing, what Dogen is saying, but then, after tomorrow, I forget about this, because I have something else I have to face. So, Matsuoka used to speak of the koan practice.

[99:10]

He said that in Sokozen, it was considered superfluous, or extraneous, it was added, you know, extra added on. When we sit in Zazen, we're sitting in the Genzo koan, sitting in the real koan. So then, in our daily life, everything that comes to us is really the koan, so to speak. So, it's not necessarily carrying a koan, but endless koans. Anyway, this is my practice. Okay? Please. That's good. And you mentioned that, you know, okay, when you're practicing, for example, Shikantaza, staying with that practice, the driving, that you know, you're just driving.

[100:13]

Also, on the other hand, you mentioned that, I don't know, it was yours or somebody else, they said, our greatest feature is nature. So, the time I'm sitting, supposedly I'm not thinking about anything, and I see that, you know, my head is going to blow up, you know, by all kinds of thoughts. At that time, if I see Mu, for example, or anything that helps me to get rid of that concept, or any kind of thought that comes into my head, if I could just attack that mind and get rid of it, do you think it is wrong to use that tool for the sake of, because I want to maintain just one practice and that is Shikantaza? At that time, if I see any kind of practice, whether it's a koan practice, or when I see it is dead, at that moment, I am dead. Totally dead. And I see that I need a kind of new air to come in, even for a moment. What is your feedback about it? I don't know.

[101:19]

I mean, in my practice, I never did such a thing. So, I can't say it's right or wrong. It's up to you. We can say it's evil. Oh, please. To follow up on what you said, part of the instructions for Zazen are when we become distracted with thoughts, strengthen our posture, watch our breath, make it easier, and that itself brings us back to what we are supposed to be doing when we are sitting. So, this distraction is a distraction for the moment, to follow it up, to make comments about it. It makes it bigger.

[102:22]

Suzuki Roshi wrote somewhere, your thoughts will come in, don't invite them to tea. Well, in the case of Zen, we did it from upright posture, deep and smooth breathing, and keep our eyes open, that means don't sleep, and letting go of thoughts. And whenever we did it from this point, we return to that point. This is our practice. To me, this is not done by my mind. I return to this point, not because I think I should, but somehow, using body, not only body, but this is not done by my thinking,

[103:25]

so it's up to whether when you do that thing with your mind, then it's another thinking, and it's not Zazen. Thank you. Please. I guess, from what it was in my own experience, I thought that when I started learning mindfulness practices, that I was helped by them, and then I learned in San Francisco, I learned some other practices, shamatha practices, and I thought they were very helpful, and the only thing that I don't know is that I was also going from not practicing with a teacher, because I was in Duluth, to being with a teacher, and so I couldn't say whether it was the other practice that was helpful, or the contact with a teacher that was helpful. But, I still believe, you know, there was benefit there, whatever the reason was.

[104:35]

Please. Since we're talking about our practice, I, in particular, This man is so much... Enlightened. Enlightened. When my thinking comes back, I usually have emotional charge behind it. Emotional charge. Yes. You mean in your present? Yes. Under the thoughts is an emotional charge. And many times, this tension that you were saying, I have to go back to the emotional, and just by paying attention to it,

[105:41]

if I locate it, then it dissolves. And usually that is what releases me from thoughts coming back and forth. So I have to deal with my thoughts in my emotional underlayment, before it goes away. Well, again, it's up to what you really do, when you say to deal with it, if you deal with thinking, that might be a problem, but if you deal with being, you know, it's there, and don't fight against it, don't try to understand this, but just sit with this, and it stays for a while and disappears. But if you mean this is how to deal with it, I think it's okay. But if we start to talk with this,

[106:45]

make conversation with this thing, and try to kill this or try to end up in this, then that is a problem. So that's all. Okay, thank you.

[106:58]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ