Tonight I'm continuing the series of talks that I'm doing some of the time on the cases of the Book of Serenity Koan Collection, and we're up to case nine. And this story is one of the most dramatic and controversial of all the Zen stories, one of the most difficult, one of the most painful. Maybe one of the most helpful. It's about Nanchuan and Zhaozhou, or in Japanese, Nansen and Joshu. Nanshuan lived 749 to 834. His student, Zhaozhou, or Zhaoshu, lived 778 to 895 is one version. He lived about 120 years. And if you can say about anyone that they were the greatest Zen master who ever lived, you'd probably say it about Zhaozhou, just because he lived so long.

[01:15]

But there's so many stories about him, wonderful stories. There's a story about a dog. There's a story about a A cypress tree. Anyway, this story is when he was studying with his teacher, Nanchuan. And I'll just read the version from, I'm using Cleary's translation from the Book of Serenity, Shoya Roku. One day at Nanchuan's temple, the eastern and western halls were arguing over a cat. When Nanchuan saw this, he took and held it up and said, If you can speak, I won't cut it. The group had no reply. Nanshuan then cut the cat in two. Nanshuan brought this up later, brought up the foregoing incident to Zhaozhou, who had, I guess, been away at the time, and asked him.

[02:17]

Zhaozhou immediately took off his sandals, put them on his head, and left. Nanshuan said, if you had been here, you could have saved the cat. So this is a pretty dramatic story in lots of ways. Well, I'll read the introduction to the Book of Serenity version. The story appears in many places, but it's, one song said in his commentary, kick over the ocean and dust flies on the earth. Scatter the clouds with shouts and empty space shatters. Strictly executing the true imperative is still half the issue. As for the complete manifestation of the great function, how do you carry it out? And, excuse me, I'll read Hongzhe's verse comments, too, which I'm not going to comment on so much, but they're an important part of the Book of Serenity that Wan Zong later wrote comments on, in case of the verse.

[03:26]

Hongzhe said, the monks of both halls were all arguing. So they were arguing about whether the cat should be on the left or the right side. Old Teacher Nanshuan was able to show up true and false, cutting through with a sharp knife, all oblivious of formalities. For a thousand ages, he makes people admire an adept. This path has not perished. A connoisseur is to be lauded. And then another part of the comment, all Jiaozhou had a life. Wearing sandals on his head, he attains a bit. Coming in differences still clearly mirroring, only this real gold is not mixed with sand. So there's a lot to say about this story. Of course, it's a violation of the first precept, the disciple of Buddha does not kill.

[04:27]

And some of us are cat lovers and particularly feel the pain of this story. So again, the basic story, the left and right side of the monk's hall were fighting over a cat. Both sides wanted the cat on their side. And Nanchuan saw them fighting and held up the cat and said, if you can speak, I won't cut it. And the story goes that there was no reply and Nanchuan cut the cat in two. You know, the first precept about not killing maybe becomes most alive when we think of animals. Of course, we shouldn't kill people either.

[05:33]

But probably most of us, I know I have killed insects. Sometimes we put out traps or poison for other animals. Some of us have done so. It's nice if we can catch an insect and take it outside. When I lived in Kyoto, I was living in a tatami room about a quarter the size of this room or less. And they had these big cockroaches about, I don't know, so big. As long as they stayed behind the walls, I didn't care. But I confess now. to all of you that when they came out onto the tatami, I did extinguish their lives. And there wasn't anybody arguing over left and right either to make a point to. So I have violated the first precept.

[06:37]

And apparently, Nanchuan did too. But there's various questions about this. So I'm going to read some things from Wansun's comment on the verse. He said, leaders, Nanchuan didn't offer them forgiveness when they were arguing over in the two halls. or encouragement, nor did he give them admonition and punishment. A genuine man of the way, he used the fundamental matter to help people. Holding up the cat, he said, if you can say a word, I won't cut it. At that moment, all sentient and inanimate beings in the whole universe are alike in Nanchuan's hands, begging for their lives. master and kill the cat.

[07:47]

So Wansunk says, at that point, if there had been someone, one of the monks in the assembly, to come forward and either extend open hands or else grab him by the chest and hold him tight and say, after all, we sympathize with the master's spiritual work. Then even if Nanshuan had specially carried out the Zhu imperative, I dare say that person would have been able to save the cat. But Wansong continues, this den of dead rats had no energy at all. Once Nanshuan held forth, he wouldn't withdraw, and he acted out the order to the full. Now there's long been questions about this from various perspectives. So this is an ancient, you know, so, Nanchuan died in 834 and we're still talking about this. Wansong comments about one master who criticized Nanchuan's group for killing a living being, committing wrongdoing.

[09:00]

He said the monks in the assembly had killed the cat. Another ancient teacher said, an ancient text has it that he just made the Gesture of cutting. How could he have simply cut it in two with one stroke, sending forth blood gushing everywhere? In these two critiques of the ancient, Wan Song says the latter comment is the graver. So this is, you know, this is, we have ethical questions about how to enact the dharma. And here we have Nanchuan cutting this cat in two. So then the second part of the story, and actually the Blue Cliff Record version divides into two different cases, 63 and 64. Zhao Zhou shows up, took off his sandals, put them on his head when he was told about this, and went out. Wansun says, after all, drumming and singing go together, as it says in the Jalmer Samadhi.

[10:07]

Clapping the interval was accomplished perfectly. Nanshuan said, if you had been here, you could have saved the cat. So what does the story have to do with us? How do we understand this horrible story? Maybe it's not so horrible to us. Our culture is full of television and movies about violence. And there's violence on the streets of Chicago. And what's one cat more or less? Anyway, Dogen talks about this in his collection of teaching stories of Koads in volume nine of his extensive record, he has two interesting verse comments. The first, Nanchuan repeatedly called for a saying, his monks were refined with voices like thunder.

[11:10]

So Dogen implies that the monks actually spoke very loudly. How sad, the cat's life like so much dew with cold sword. Sentimental doubts were cut through. Another verse from Dogen. Nanshuang held up the cat and said, if you can speak, the cat will live, otherwise it dies. And there's an earlier version of this, of the extensive record where the interpretation is that Nanshuang held up the cat and the cat said, if you can speak, this cat will live, otherwise it dies. Tell me, Tolkien goes on, whether Nanshuan heard the monks in both halls with voices like thunder. So that's another way to hear this story, that they actually did respond. Silence is sometimes a kind of response. So there's lots and lots of, you know, there are libraries full of comments on this story.

[12:18]

Dogen also talked about this story in a text called Shobogenzo Zui Mon Ki, not the regular Shobogenzo, but a series of talks to his students early on. And this one is a dialogue between Dogen and Koen Ejodeo, his successor. Dogen added, if I had been Nanshuang, I would have said, if you cannot speak, I will kill it. Even if you can speak, I will kill it. Who would fight over a cat? Who can save the cat? On behalf of the students, Dogen says, I would have said, we are not able to speak, master. Go ahead and kill the cat. Or I would have said to them, master, you only know about cutting the cat into two with one stroke, yet you do not know about cutting it into one with one stroke?

[13:23]

Dogen added, if I had been Nanchuan when the students could not answer, I would have released the cat saying that the students had already spoken. So that's the interpretation, you know, implied by Wansong, that they did speak. An ancient master said, when the great function manifests itself, no fixed rules exist. So is the precept about not killing a fixed rule? This is a difficult story. Dogen also said, this action of nanchuans, that is, cutting the cat, is a manifestation of the great function of the Buddhadharma. This is a pivot word. If it were not a pivot word, it could not be said that mountains, rivers, and the great earth are the excellent, pure, and bright mind. So all these stories, we don't know how accurate, historically, they are. We know that there was a guy named Nanchuan, and we have his dates, and we know about Zhaozhou and his states.

[14:30]

And we don't really know that much about, well, we don't know so much about either of them. We don't have any videotape. Thomas Cleary and his, this story is also in the Gateless Barrier collection, and Thomas Cleary in his commentary says some interesting things. He says, Zhao Zhou's farcical act silently remarks that to be enslaved by something that originally was supposed to foster liberation is like being worn by a pair of shoes instead of wearing them. So this practice is about liberation. This practice is about living fully in wholeness. Nanshuan was asking something of his students. Oh, and I should mention that Wumen, in the Gateless Barrier, that's a collection where there's just the case and a short prose and a short verse saying by Wumen or Mumon in Japanese, in his verse,

[15:43]

Wu Men says, had Zhaozhou been present, he'd have executed the order in reverse, snatching the knife away and Nanshuang begging for his life. So that's another, you know, all of these are, these, these. Koans, these old teaching stories, are kind of performances that we can imagine. It's one good way to work with them is to think about who would you cast as Nanshuang and who would you cast as Zhaozhou. Maybe it would be De Niro and Pacino, I don't know. But you can imagine what was going on there. And then what was going on, who was in the assembly? Was the assembly like this? Maybe it was like this, maybe the left side and the right side were fighting. Left and right sometimes fight, it happens. Cleary goes on to say though. In case some may think Wu Man's inclusion of Nanchuan here is random or is trivial, consider the historical fact that many seekers of Zen Buddhism have actually labored at length over the supposed issue of whether or not Nanchuan actually took the life of a living being in this story.

[16:57]

as we've been considering. This is not a morality play, here he says. Not because there are no relevant morals in Buddhism, but because those morals are not in any way in question here. Just as the ontology of animal Buddha nature was not in question in the first koan about the dog's Buddha nature. It is not that there is no use in irrelevant non-questions supposedly arising from Zen koans. When I'm talking about these often, I'll bring up such irrelevant non-questions as part of the consideration. Because the point of these stories is not to solve them or get some answer or figure them out. The point of these stories is to inform our practice bodies. But Cleary goes on, their use is in the illustration of irrelevancy and meaninglessness, not in elucidating the koans.

[18:04]

So how do we see, how do we use these stories to see what our practice is really about? How do we, you know, do we obscure the real point of the koan, which is in the living application of insight? So what's going on? What's the story really about? Is it about a cat? Is it about Zhaozhou? Is it about Nanchuan? Is it about a monk's? Is it about monks or is it about the fighting between left and right? What's going on in this story? How can we see the urgency of this story? So I've been talking recently about the point of just sitting, the purpose of just sitting.

[19:12]

Dogen especially emphasizes this. The point of just sitting is not to become some virtuoso meditator. The point of just sitting is not just to become calm and serene and settle into deep communion with the interconnectedness of all beings and the wholeness of the universe. I mean, that's wonderful. That's the starting point. But what is the point of just sitting? And Dogen emphasizes expression. So as we're sitting on our seat, as we're sitting, standing, walking, or lying down. In zazen, we are expressing Buddha in this body. So the point of our practice is to express something, to respond, not just to some pain in our knees, but to the pain of the world.

[20:24]

pain of how do we take care of all this fighting between left and right? How do we take care of all of the struggles in our own lives and in our interactions with people we work with or family or the people we encounter? And Nanshuan is challenging them and saying, say something. Speak. If you don't, I'm gonna cut this cat in two. So how does this, what's the life of this story today? Do you imagine this is not happening today? So we have fossil fuel companies ready to cut our world in two as climate damage enhances hurricanes and wildfires and famine and drought.

[21:47]

We have weapons manufacturers ready to destroy not just cats, millions and millions of people as the fossil fuel companies and weapons companies manage our government and governments around the world and threaten to cut our world into The point of our practice is just to respond. There's not one right way to respond. Zhaozhou put his sandals on his head and walked out. Actually, it happens. I've heard that in Tang China, putting your shoes on your head is a symbol of mourning. How do we respond? Not that that's the solution to the koan, but how do we respond?

[22:50]

How do we say something when we see a cat or a person or a community or a world about to be cut into two? How do we cut through all of the arguing over which side is right? So the joy and wonder of this practice where we learn to just settle and find deep communion with all beings and the wholeness of our own lives and of our situation, that's great. But Nanchuan is saying, speak, say something, respond, express yourself. It's not that there's a right response. It's not about fixing anything. It's about just saying something. How do we express our deepest heart, our deepest love?

[23:50]

How do we respond to the problems in our own life and in the world and in our aching legs? So Nanchuan challenged those monks. And since then, there have been all these debates. Well, maybe they did respond. Their violence was a response. Or did he really cut the cat in two? That's not really the point, as Cleary indicates. How do we respond? So this is a very challenging story. It's a dangerous story. It's a troubling story. And again, I really like cats. I have two of them waiting for me at home. So I could keep babbling, but I'm interested in hearing what any of you have to say. Please, speak. Say something. Hoketsu. They couldn't share the cat.

[25:17]

They couldn't be like, you know, let's talk about this. I want the cat. I want the cat. How are you going to deal with this cat? They couldn't say to Tato, please, or to Nachman, please don't kill the cat. Let's talk. So there's something about that. Didn't he do it? Well, we don't really know. There's all this dispute. Dogen says he didn't really cut the cat in two. But I forgot to mention, one thing I was going to mention, case Douglas? Well, no, I just wanted to mention, one thing I wanted to mention was Book of Serenity case 69, in which Nanchuan says,

[26:20]

All the Buddhas of the three times do not know what it is. Cats and cows know what it is. So Nantuan had great respect for cats and cows. I think, I guess, his point about the conversation is that it's very hard to tell a story that's two different stories. Right. Right.

[27:28]

You're right, but you're wrong. Yeah, Nanshuang said, oh, yeah, thank you for doing something. You saved the cat. And we can talk about what Xiaozhou did. He might have done something else. He responded. That's the part I'm kind of emphasizing. But yeah, we could talk about him talking about, so as the Jewel of Meru Samadhi says, which also talks about how for those capable of wonder, for the wide-eyed cats and there are cats and white oxen. And yeah, you were referring to the ancient sages grieved and offered

[28:34]

them the Dharma, led by their inverted views, they take black for white. When inverted thinking stops, the affirming mind naturally accords." So yeah, Topas was sort of referencing those lines. And yeah, how do we find accord? How do we find affirmation? How do we, again, how do we express something? It's not enough to hide in some meditation hall. Other responses or comments or utterances? Yes, Alex. So whether or not he actually killed the cat is almost irrelevant.

[29:40]

Yes, good. Because he never intended to let them continue clinging to the cat. Right. He never gave them an opportunity to come out of that perplexing spot. Yeah, he's cutting through clinging. He's cutting through attachment. You want the cats? No, you want the cats. Well, no. What's that about? Why are you fighting? Yeah, but you're saying something about consequences.

[30:43]

What do you mean in this context? For the cat, or for the monks, or for Nanjuan, or for Zhaozhou, or for us? Okay. And, you know, part of the point of a lot of the commentators is whatever happened to the cat, whether it was cut into two or cut into one, the consequence is that we're still talking about it. Yes, Sharon. I don't really know what to do with these thoughts or what point they make, but there's something almost sweet about it that they both want the cat.

[31:43]

It's not that they're wanting it to go away, but my cat always climbs onto my lap when I sit, and there's something very tender about it. And then the other thought I had is that cats go where they want to go. It's making it stick to one side. Yeah. Yeah, imagining what that must have looked like. Yeah, that's a very good point. It makes this story very funny. They're arguing, yeah. But who asks the cat? And what is the, and the version of Doken's poem where the cat's saying, hey, say something.

[32:47]

Yes, Dylan. Is it possible that there's also a meaning about the importance of pivotal? Yes. will wait for the situation to be over. There's something wrong, and everybody's like, well, I hope somebody steps in. Yeah, somebody else. It reminds me of a story I heard of the Suzuki Roshi, where they were at the San Francisco Zen Center. And there was somebody who was new that was doing the Hama. And it was supposed to go off at like 3.45 AM, but it didn't. And the rest of the story is that he actually went around with a kyosaku and hit everybody in the zendo really hard.

[33:54]

Like Nanchuan with his knife. Yeah, and as I was saying about our world, we're at a pivotal moment in terms of climate, in terms of the president talking about getting rid of the nuclear test, nuclear weapons ban treaty that Ronald Reagan and Gorbachev signed in the early 80s. They announced that now. So this isn't about left or right either. This is a bipartisan craziness. Anyway, yeah, so there's a pivotal moment. What are we going to do? And there's not one right response. A long time ago, somebody put their shoes on their head and walked out. But the story is about, what's that Kategori Roshi book, You Have to Say Something?

[35:23]

We're called to respond. That's what Zazen is about. We sit quietly, still, for a while, settling. It's from that place that Zhao Zhou responded and put his sandals on his head. So the story is happening today. And all the good koans are about something happening in our practice today. Any last thoughts, responses? Say something. Yes, Akash. This was a way to bring to life the fact that craving and attachment to certain things,

[36:32]

And why was that the solution? Good, yeah. Yeah, excellent example of this story and its repercussions. Thank you all very much. Please continue to respond in your life from Zazen. We'll close with the four bodhisattva vows. Beings are numberless. I vow to free them. Delusions are inexhaustible. I vow to end them. Dharma gates are boundless. I vow to enter them. Buddha's way is unsurpassable.

[38:07]

I vow to realize it. Beings are numberless. I vow to free them. Delusions are inexhaustible. I vow to end them. Dharma gates are boundless. I vow to enter them. Buddha's way is unsurpassable. I vow to realize it. Beings are numberless. I vow to free them. Delusions are inexhaustible. I vow to end them. Dharma gates are boundless. I vow to enter them, but this way is unsurpassable.

[39:14]

I vow to realize it.

[39:18]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_89.32