Good afternoon. This morning I talked about the story of dog's buddha nature, and who and who. There are several varieties of the story. And I talked about two traditional interpretations of this story. One is in Momonkan, traditionally used in Rinzai tradition, and another is Hisho Yoroku, or Book of Serenity. And these two are very different. And now I need to talk on Dogen Zenji's interpretation of this story. Maybe one thing I have to say before talking about this is, better to forget everything I said this morning.

[01:06]

So different. Page 91, the last paragraph of page 91. I first read the first half of the story and his comment. That is about, in this case, no Buddha nature. Among us Chao-chu, Chuen-chi-pa-shi, that is Jo-shu, Does that dog have the buddha nature or not?

[02:07]

The meaning of this question must be clarified. It asks neither whether a dog has the buddha nature or whether it does not have the buddha nature. It asks, does a man of iron still practice the way? Kyōshū, or Jōshū, blundered into a poisoned hand, and his resentment may be intense, but it is a means of seeing half a real thing at last, after thirty years. Jōshū said, no, or no. Hearing this word, of course, the course of practice to be pursued opened up. The moon, the Buddha nature, declares itself to be. The moon, the dog, declares itself to be.

[03:11]

Both must be utterances like Joshu's moon. So does the moon, a bystander calls out. Such a moon is a sun with stone-melting power. The monk said, All sentient beings, everyone, have the Buddha nature. Why doesn't the dog? What this essentially says is, were there no sentient beings, there would be no Buddha nature. There would be no dog either. Essentially, it means what? Dog, Buddha nature, what need have they to be called Joshu said, it is because the dog exists in karmic consciousness. The meaning of these words is that existence for the sake of others is karmic consciousness.

[04:19]

Although his existence in karmic consciousness is existence for the sake of others, it is dog-moon. It is Buddha-nature-move. Karmic consciousness never understands the dog. How could the dog encounter the Buddha-nature? Whether we speak of a distance in karmic consciousness, a distance for the sake of others, or of dog-move, or Buddha-nature-move, they are always karmic consciousness. Because Dogen Zenji respected Wanshi, the Chinese Soto Zen master, who compiled, collected the 100 koans and made poems and produced the material for Shonoroku.

[05:33]

Dogen Zenji succeeded that story and consisted of two parts. In one part, in the Shoyoroku, first Joshu said U and second Joshu said Mu. But here, Dogenden changed the order. And I think this has some meaning. I mean, if Joshu first said U, and then move, the interpretation by Gansho, Joshu, or even Wanshi, that first Joshu gave the jewel and make it, take it away. But if move is first, then that interpretation is not possible. I think that is the point.

[06:36]

So Dogen didn't say anything about this change of order, but we must be very careful about this. And this is, I think this is my guess, but this is the same as the, you know, in Section 8 and 9, Dogen discussed about enkans, living beings, Buddha-nature, or U-bushsho, and Issan's Mu-bushsho. And I introduced a story from Shinji Shobo Gendo, over 300 koans, entitled Shobo Gendo, collected by Dogen. But somehow, Dogen didn't quote that story. He only quoted Tenkan's and Issan's saying of being U-bushsho and Mu-bushsho. So he Kato, the part of two monks, talked with Yanshan, or Josan.

[07:43]

That is, Isan said, all living beings have no buddha nature. And Enkan said, all living beings have buddha nature, or wu busho. And two monks from Enkan's assembly visited Isan, and tried to figure out what Isam's meaning, but they couldn't. And they thought Isam's teaching is not a Buddhist teaching. And one day, those two monks found Isam's major disciple, Ryo-san, and they had a conversation. And they said, It's important to study Buddhism. So don't be lazy. So you should diligently practice Buddhism. That means your teacher's teaching is not Buddhism.

[08:46]

And no Buddha nature is not Buddhism. Then, I think you remember, Nagyosa made a circle with hands on the air, and hold it and throw it away. and show his hands, and he said the same thing. This is Buddhism. We should be decent to practice Buddhism. But those two monks didn't understand. Dogenzin, I think, Dogenzin didn't like this idea. This is, again, same as, I think, Shoyoroku's interpretation of this koan. It's kind of a two-step. First you should find the buddha nature. Then next you should take it away or throw it away or be free from buddha nature. So this is a kind of two-step method. First you have to understand it and find it and hold it.

[09:50]

And yet that is not the end of the story of practice. We have to throw it away. We must become free from it. That is one kind of approach of Zen practice. First you discover Buddha nature and practice it and hold it and after that you need to slip away, become free from that and just practice. But Dogen Rin didn't like this idea of two-step method. He is always discussing Reality is only one. Right now, right here. We can't expect anything in the future. We can't hold on to something we did in the past. This is it. That's it. So when we study Shobo, not only Shobo Genzo, but Dogen's writings, what he didn't write is also important.

[11:03]

So we must be very carefully study what he's writing, and to study the sources or materials he used, and we need to find what he didn't mention. but he, I can say, lived it up. It's important to understand that, though he really wanted to sleep. I think that is why he put the move, or move the nature first, instead of move. So the question is very familiar with us. Does that dog have the Buddha nature or not? And he said the meaning of this question must be clarified.

[12:09]

That means it's not clear. We think the meaning of this question is very clear. Whether the dog has Buddha nature or not. What else can this question mean? And actually, this translation didn't translate one sentence. And I understand why it didn't translate. Because I also work on translation. It's nonsense. In a common sense. The Japanese sentence is, kusu to wa ii no nani? You know, the question is kusu. This shows This is kusu.

[13:28]

U is have, gosho is buddha nature, or not. So does kusu have buddha nature or not? This kusu is a Chinese word for dog, but this is not Japanese. So Pat Dogen said, kusu is inu. Inu is Japanese word for kusu. So he said, kusu is inu. But if you translate this into English, a dog is a dog. And it's just a repetition of the same word. So it doesn't make sense to translate. And this might not. be important. But it can be very important. Dog is a dog.

[14:33]

But dog is nothing other than dog. Dog cannot be a Buddha. Dog cannot be a Buddha nature. Dog is a dog, pure. Same as, you know, Buddha said in Shobo Genzo, Makahana hands. Emptiness is emptiness, period. Foam is foam, period. So, Buddha, I mean, dog is dog, period. It can be a very important expression. But this translator, you know, Ignatiy, because he thinks this is simply the explanation of what kusu is for Japanese people. What is the principle again? Is kusu or ino nani? How is the expression in Japanese?

[15:35]

Kusu towa ino nani? That is, kusu is referred to, but kusu means adults. Then he said, asks neither whether a dog has the buddha nature or whether it does not have the buddha nature. So, according to Dogen, this question is not a matter of whether a dog has buddha nature or not. But this is really unique. He interprets this question as, does a man of iron still practice the way? The man of iron is Kek Kam. Kek Kam. Kek is iron. And Kam is man. This expression, tekkam, appeared in some Zen texts within some koans.

[16:59]

But tekkam means the person who is really deeply determined to practice Buddha way. So, the question does or is The tekkam, is the idle person still practicing or not? Means... It's not a question. And tekkam means the person who is practicing. Never, constantly, never stop practicing. So is tekkam still practicing? Means... Kind of nonsense. It's not a necessary question. It's a matter of course. If the person is not practicing, he's not a tekkam or iron person.

[18:01]

So if he's a tekkam or iron person, of course he's practicing. That means this question, does Buddha have Buddha nature or not, means according to Dogen, not according to the common way of reading this sentence. But at least according to Dogen, this means does buddha-nature have buddha-nature or not? So this question is not really a question. And what they are talking about using the example of buddha-nature, Dogu's buddha-nature, is how Bodhisattva, very deeply determined Bodhisattva is practicing. Joshi blundered a poisoned hand and his resentment may be intense.

[19:15]

But it is a means of seeing how for a real saint at last, after 30 years. I'm not sure. What does a joshua branded a poison hand mean in English? Branded a poison hand. What does it mean? It doesn't make sense. That doesn't make sense. What does it say in Japanese? It is... It sounds like a game, you know, like you take a card and you don't play it properly. It's a mistake. Mistake. So, this means... Joshu made a mistake with using a poison hand.

[20:20]

He thought he was doing something else but blundered into a poison hand by saying what he said. So this poison hand is Joshu's hand or either Manth's hand. Manth's hand. So Joshu made a mistake. to deal with the holding hand of the monk. That means, monk wins. Joshu rules. That's what it means. And then it's okay. Then it's okay. How do you say that in Japanese? How would you translate that? Actually, in Japanese, there's no subject. So we cannot It's difficult to tell who wins, who loses. The poison hand here may have the meaning of poison, curing poison. Yeah. I think this poison came from Shoryuken.

[21:21]

Poison in Shoryuken. So this question by the monk was a poison hand. And Joshu made a mistake. So he was poisoned. So even in Japanese, modern translation, translation to modern Japanese, depending upon the translator, different. Someone said, Joshua made a mistake. Someone said, the monk made a mistake. My understanding is that Joshu made a mistake. Joshu mistakenly dealt with this poisoned handle. And his resentment may be intense. Joshu made a mistake.

[22:26]

He may have intense resentment, It is a means of seeing half of a real saint at last, after 30 years. This also came from one Zen story. This story is again one of the Basho's disciples. His name was Sekcho Eizo. This person used to be a hunter. He was always carrying the, what do you call it, arrows, bows and arrows. Even after he became monk. And for 30 years, whenever a monk visited him to ask for Dharma, he put an arrow on the bow and tried to shoot the parakeet. And of course, for 30 years,

[23:30]

He couldn't find any two-way seekers. But finally, one person, his name was Gichu. And when Seikyo tried to shoot the person, he didn't escape, but he opened his rosary and asked to shoot him. And this saying was by the master. I have been looking for 30 years, looking for a true practitioner for 30 years. And finally I found half a person. You didn't say one person. Half, not a half a cent. Half a cent. So that means Joshu finally found a real practitioner. So Dogen praised the person who made this question, does a dog have buddha nature or not.

[24:42]

No one else said such a thing. And Joshu said, Mu, hearing this word, The course of practice to be perceived opened up. So Mu is an instruction to show how we should practice. The Mu, the Buddha nature declares itself to be. The Mu, the dog declares itself to be. Both must be appearances like Joshu's knee.

[25:30]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ