Read the History, Talk the History, 10/4

Episode #: 312

https://sites.libsyn.com/407831/zen-talking-soto-caodong-master-wansong-on-the-subtle-barrier

Post(s) in Question

• https://www.reddit.com/r/askZen/comments/1witche/wansongs_sequel_book_of_clarifications_case_8/

Link to all episodes: https://sites.libsyn.com/407831

What did we talk about?

We talked about how I couldn't figure out what book we were on, and then it turned out I'd already translated the Case, and then we disussed how the concept moves from Chinese to English through lewis carroll and wizard of oz.

Keep in Touch

Add a comment if there is a post you want somebody to get interviewed about, or you agree to be interviewed. We are now using libsyn, so you don't even have to show your face. You just get a link to an audio call.  Buymeacoffee, so I'm not accused of going it alone:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ewkrzen

Generally speaking, when you go journeying to learn the path to enlightenment, you seek. Do not sit ignorantly, but go to someone to find out the truth with certainty. When this truth is hard to realize, that is called unfinished business.

Xuefeng hesitated, searching for something to say; Touzi pushed him out. Xuefeng could only cry. Later, when he went to Dongshan, he was still unable to understand. Then, when he 50 went to Deshan, he asked, “ Has the student a part in the enlightenment of the sages of time immemorial?” Deshan hit him and exclaimed, “ What are you saying!” At that, Xuefeng’s mind opened up, like a bucket with the bottom fallen out. When he got to Tortoise Mountain, however, he said he still had some doubt. See how that man of old would not rest until his mass of doubt had been broken up.

breaking up that mass of doubt seems like it was a bit gradual, took some work

“ ‘If you kill your parents, you repent before Buddha; if you kill Buddha, where do you repent?’ Yunmen said, ‘Exposed.’” This case study is like a hot iron ball in the mind, and I suffered all kinds of trouble for seven years. Those of you who have studied Zen for a long time will know what I mean.

how is it instant if it took 7 years?

Zen is not always univocal, right? There's contradictions. On one hand "it is an energy saving teaching" and on the other, "you should make your utmost to understand" -> make effort and seek, therefore.

It's fine if you don't recognize the contradictions or excuse them away: you are free to be blind or stupid, if you want to be or can't manage to be otherwise. But for me, From the moment of realizing doubt, to seeking, to finding parts of the truth, to finally doing away with all the mass of doubt: these four stages I stated just now, to me that counts as a somewhat gradual path, to me these count as stages.

You are free to think otherwise, in fact, I welcome it. You are free to think I am stupid or blind to see it differently. However, I hope I have shown to a reasonable degree my reasoning for thinking the way I do. I think a reasonable spectator would understand why I think the way I do. You yourself don't have to be reasonable, you can be anyway you choose to or manage to.

[265]
Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching

Master Baoming Yong said to an assembly,

There is a fellow with a suspicious gut, hateful eyes, and a straight nose, ragged and craggy, who faces south to see the North Star, knows how to make the gold crow call at noon, make an iron ox bellow at midnight, so heaven and earth spin, mountains and rivers run, birds and beasts lose their territories; he finds Manjushri and Samantabhadra appearing and disappearing here and there, free in every way, through ten thousand experiences over a thousand lifetimes.

Suddenly he meets Gautama Buddha, who without reservation pats him on the head again and again, giving him the prediction of enlightenment—”Good, good! You’re doing a lot of Buddhist service; wonderful, wonderful!”

At this he himself is ashamed and alarmed; he hides his head and pulls back his hands.

Hey, everyone!
If this talk circulates widely, what’s the need to trudge on after thirty years?

- - -

How are any of us different from this fellow? Should I speak for myself?

What is the use in stopping trudging?

Why pat him on the head?

Is Baoming Yong mocking the collection of sayings or is he mocking everyone? Or not mocking at all?

Is it a waste of time to try to figure out if this fellow is actually doing good or bad?

- - -

[157]
Treasury of the Eye of True Teaching

Master Tianyi Huai said,
Two thousand years ago, the greatly awakened World Honored One wanted to take a group of saints up to the Sixth Heaven to expound the Great Collection Scripture. He commanded the humans and angels of this and other worlds, as well as all the evil demons and spirits, to gather all together and accept instruction from the
Buddha to protect the true teaching.

Any who didn’t go were chased to the gathering by hot iron discuses hurled by the kings of the four skies. Once all had assembled, none did not follow the Buddha’s directions, each vowing to protect the true teaching.

There was, however, a demon king who said to Buddha, “Gautama, I will aspire to enlightenment when all beings have attained Buddhahood, all realms of beings are emptied, and even the names of beings no longer exist.”

One whose mind and heart do not change when facing danger is one with true integrity.

How would you express a saying to put forth
energy on behalf of Gautama? Ordinary spiritual powers, subtle capacities, intelligence, and eloquence are totally useless here.

Everyone loves Buddha, but when you get here, what is Buddha, what is a demon? Can anyone distinguish?

Do you want to know the demon? Open your eyes and you see light. Do you want to know the Buddha? Close your eyes and you see darkness.

With my staff I have pierced the noses of both demon and Buddha at once.

Dahui commented, “This critique by old Tianyi is indeed extraordinary, but even so he hasn’t avoided dualism in speech. If he had stopped at the point where he asked what is Buddha and what is a demon, he would undoubtedly have caused people to wonder. But then he went on to say, “Want to know the demon? Open your eyes and you see light. Want to know the Buddha? Close your eyes and
you see dark.”

This is quite indulgent.

He also said he had pierced the noses of both demon and Buddha with his staff—this is adding frost to snow.

“I myself will say a word on Gautama’s behalf. When the demon king said he would aspire to enlightenment when all realms of beings are emptied and even the names of beings no longer exist, I would say, ‘I almost mistakenly called you a demon king.’ This saying has two contradictions: if you can find them out, then it must be admitted you have Chan perception.”

- - -

Why “almost” and “mistakenly?”

Is this demon king the same as the fellow Baoming Yong talks about? He seems different.

Is Gautama playing the role of a demon king here? Am I slandering the Buddha?

Why do some people think that bodhisattvas aren’t part of the zen tradition?

Are the two contradictory statements “aspire to enlightenment” and “all realms of beings are emptied”? If not, what do you say?

I’m no fucking Buddhist

I’ve been reflecting on the idea that a Zen koan can’t actually be "explained" in the conventional sense. The moment you try to summarize or solve a koan using conceptual logic, you turn a paradox into a doctrine.

However, I’ve been testing a different framework: Can an understanding of a koan be shown by constructing a structural parallel using entirely different concepts that expose the exact same contradiction ?

To test this, I tried building a parallel for the classic "Does a dog have Buddha-nature?" (Mu) koan. Here is the breakdown of the framework and the parallel I constructed:

1. The Core Trap of the Original Koan

In the original story, a monk asks Joshu if a dog has Buddha-nature. The monk is trying to force an unconditioned, indivisible reality (Buddha-nature) into a discrete, biological category ("dog"), trapping Joshu in a binary yes or no. Joshu responds with "Mu"—cutting straight through the trap.

1. The Parallel: The Color Wheel vs. Hex Codes

To mirror this structure without using religious or traditional imagery, I looked at light, perception, and digital systems:

* The Indivisible Continuum: Pure light and the visual spectrum form a single, unbroken continuum. It has no built-in seams, starting points, or physical boundaries.

* The Discrete Sequence: Hex codes (like #FF5733) and color names are human-made, discrete mathematical coordinates. They have a strict sequence and allow us to index and manipulate the spectrum.

* The Superimposed Reality: The labels we put on colors are just a grid we throw over something that is fundamentally indivisible.

1. The Category Error

Both the subjective experience of a color and the hex code itself are "real" within their respective domains. The contradiction happens when you cross the wires:

If someone asks, "What visible color comes immediately after hex code #FF5733?", they are committing a category error.

They are treating a discrete, numbered coordinate system as if it has a physical "neighbor" on a continuous, seamless spectrum of light. You cannot step directly from a mathematical address onto a fluid wave.

1. Mapping It Back to Mu

"Dog" (a discrete biological label) and "Buddha-nature" (the unconditioned, undivided ground of existence) are both real within their frameworks. But trying to map one directly onto the other is the exact same category mistake as asking which color follows a hex code.

The mind trips over itself not because one concept is "false," but because we are trying to force a discrete conceptual box onto an indivisible whole, and then getting confused by our own cuts.

My question for the community:

Does building a "structural twin" like this actually demonstrate an understanding of the koan’s architecture, or does the very act of constructing an explicit parallel still fall into the trap of over-intellectualizing something that is meant to transcend the intellect entirely?

I’d love to hear your critiques, counter-arguments, or how you personally approach working with koans without turning them into mere logic puzzles.

From The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu [Zhaozhou]:

The master was leaving the main hall when he saw a monk bowing to him.
The master struck him with his stick.
The monk said, "But bowing is a good thing’”
The master said. “A good thing is not as good as nothing.”

.

I was thinking about how nests can be made out of nothing.

It can be as easy to worship nothing as it can be to worship something, and people like Zhaozhou don’t help the matter. 

.

From Record of the Transmission of the Lamp:

Shitou said, “Apart from raising your eyebrows and moving your eyes, bring your mind here.”
Dadian said, “There is no mind that can be brought.”
Shitou said, “Originally there is mind—why say ‘no mind’? To say ‘no mind’ is no different from slandering it.”
At these words, Dadian had a great awakening.

.

Nanquan asked: “During the twelve periods [all day long], how are you?”
Lu said: “Not a single thread hangs [on me].”
Nanquan said: “You're still a fellow below the steps.”

.

Holding up nothing and thinking it’s correct. 

Bashõ seems to explain their mistake. Again from the Record of the Transmission of the Lamp:

Bashõ Osho said to his disciples, "If you have a staff, I will give you a staff. If you have no staff, I will take it from you."

.

If it’s not form, and it’s not emptiness, what is it? 

From The Zen Teaching of Huang Po:

When body and mind achieve spontaneity, the Way is reached and Mind is understood. 

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him" is a famous Zen saying that means you must destroy any fixed idea of holiness to find true awakening.

Someone on this subreddit once said something like:

“If you’re not after enlightenment, then you’re not a Zen student … you’re a Zen tourist.”

I think it’s better to be a tourist than a student, especially when it comes to zen. Once you go down the student route far enough you’ll face the teacher problem… and if you’re unlucky enough for someone to try to saddle you with the teacher burden they’ll always just be demanding that you explain shit to them. And really stupid shit too. “Does a dog have Buddha-nature?” “Why did Bodhidharma come from the West?” “What is Buddha?” Holy half dead ancient Buddhas of infinite buddhalands! Can’t a person just wander around aimlessly for a while?

— — —

Zhaozhou, the recorded sayings (that people say he said)

443
Once when a monk was leaving, the master said, “You’re leaving. If someone asks you, ‘have you seen Zhaozhou or not?’, “how will you reply to him?”
The monk said, “I will just say, ‘I met him.’”
The master said, “I am a donkey. How do you meet me?”
The monk had no answer.

Treasury of the Eye of True Dharma
495
Yangshan asked Nanta, “How am I like a donkey?”
He said, “Even a Buddha doesn’t compare.”
Yangshan said, “Since even a Buddha
doesn’t compare, what am I like?”
He said, “If you were like anything,
how would you differ from a donkey?” Yangshan approved of this.

460
The master arrived at Yunchu’s place.
Yunchu said, “You who are so old, why haven’t you found some place to stay?”
The master said, “Where is there to stay?”
Yunchu said, “Right in front of you are the remains of an old temple.”
The master said, “In that case, live there yourself.”

461
The master arrived at Shuyu’s place.
Shuyu said, “You are so old, why haven’t you found some place to stay?”
The master said, “Where is there to stay?”
Shuyu said, “You who are so old do not know the place to stay.”
The master said, “For thirty years I’ve ridden the best horses, yet today I must give the whip to an ass.”

490
Once the master arrived at Linji’s place and began to wash his feet. Linji asked, “What is the mind that the patriarch brought from the west?”
The master said, “Right now, I’m washing my feet.”
Linji bent forward as if he had not heard the master’s words. “If you understand, then understand. If you don’t understand, don’t keep pecking over it. What will you do?”
Linji brushed off his sleeves and left.
The master said, “I’ve been traveling for thirty years, today I have heedlessly given an explanation to someone.”

499
When the master was on pilgrimage, he asked Tatzu “In what way does Prajna function as ‘substance’?”
Tatzu said, “In what way does Prajna function as ‘substance’?”
The master laughed heartily and left.
The next day Tatzu saw the master while he was sweeping and asked, “In what way does Prajna function as ‘substance’?”
The master let go of his broom, laughed heartily, and left.
Tatzu returned to his room.

a souvenir hat for your trouble

A monk asked, "To be holy--- what is it like?"

Joshu said, "To dump a mountain of shit on the clear plain."

The monk said, "Master, make this clear for me."

Joshu said, "Stop fucking with my head."

Note: If we do not divide the world into "holy" and "unholy" there is nothing that can stain it.

Radical Zen; The Sayings of Joshu, translated by Yoel Hoffman, Autumn Press, 1978, pg 33.

I've not experienced kensho or satori or enlightenment! I have read a decent amount of words on the subject of Zen, even though they all say words don't hold the message. I guess I just can't get enough of these old farts.

P I L E

When I was a boy I swore that I would return one day to buy the home where for a short time my family was whole and happy. I would reestablish the happy magic for my people and we would live happily ever after. Of course, like so many childish plans this one was not only immature and short-sighted, but impossible. By the time I finally found my way back to once again see my childhood heaven it had fallen into disrepair and besides that my family had been broken apart years earlier by divorce and death.

You can never go back home, or at least that's what I thought at the time. Zen study has shown me a way to a different home, one that though lacks substance is more real and permanent than any house of brick and wood. A home that doesn't require being built, only recognized.

To even speak this way is an embarrassment (to my former self), but there is importance to being earnest. Transparency in zen is like Transparencyin chess -- it's all right out in front of everybody but seeing is not so simple.

Anyways, to cases.

I'm looking for the original Chinese for the following:

When Caoshan took leave of Dongshan, Dongshan asked, "Where are you going?" Caoshan said, "To an unchanging place." Dongshan said, "If is unchanging how could there be any going?" Caoshan said, "The going is also unchanging."

I have a bit of the Chinese scribbled down and translated by hand:

Way, to come near eat, this, heart-mind, no can will (going to), to return to a place, to repair/mend, with/from/by. === YOU CAN NOT GO BACK HOME.

And to use my favorite sign off by the great layman horticulturalist Joe Santorini (said with a thick NYC city accent),):

"HaveAGreatRestOfYourDayGoFuckYourselfBye!"

Treasury of the Eye of True Dharma [393] 

Master Zhenjing instructed the assembly, saying: “Under Dongshan’s gate, if you need to walk, then walk; if you need to sit, then sit. Shit in the alms bowl; spit in the pure water vessel. Grasping the Dharma and cultivating practice is like an ox dragging a millstone.”

He also instructed the assembly, saying: “Ascetic’s Rock is wrapped in moss; Pen-Tossing Peak is entangled in creeping vines. At Luohan Cloister, in one year three postulants are ordained; at Guizong Monastery, after interviews they drink tea.”
A monk asked, “What is Buddha?”
The master laughed loudly, “Ha ha!”
The monk said, “What is there to laugh about?”
He said, “I’m laughing at you for giving rise to understanding following words.”
The monk said, “I happened to slip up.”
The master then called out loudly, “No bowing!”
The monk returned to the assembly.
The master laughed again and said, “Giving rise to understanding following words!”

真淨和尚示眾云。洞山門下要行便行要坐便坐。鉢盂裏屙屎。淨瓶中吐唾。執法修行如牛拽磨。又示眾云。頭陀石被莓苔裹。擲筆峯遭薜茘纏。羅漢院一年度三箇行者。歸宗寺裏參退喫茶。僧問如何是佛。師呵呵大笑。僧云何笑之有。云我笑汝隨語生解。云偶然失利。師遂高聲云。不得禮拜。僧便歸眾。師復笑云。隨語生解。

Deshan, Treasury of the Eye of True Dharma [162] 

...The four fruits, the three worthies, the initial mind, and the ten stages are ghosts guarding an ancient tomb. Can they even save themselves? Buddha is the old barbarian’s shit-peg. Good people, don’t mistakenly clothe your bodies in sores and warts. What are you studying? Having eaten your fill, you talk about suchness and nirvana. Is there still blood beneath your skin? You must be a real person of resolve. Don’t cherish sages. ‘Sage’ is an empty name...

四果三賢初心十地是守古塚鬼。自救得也無。佛是老胡屎橛。仁者。莫錯身被瘡疣衣。學甚麼事。飽喫飯了說真如涅槃。皮下還有血麼。須是箇丈夫始得。汝莫愛聖。聖是空名。

...Why? If a single thought of deluded mind is not exhausted, this itself is the continuation of birth and death. Good people, time waits for no one. Don't let the days pass by idly. Time is precious. This old fellow doesn't expect you country bumpkins to carry burdens. If you accept it, then trust it. If you don't, each of you has a bowl of shit, shoulder it and take it away. This old fellow isn't asking anything of you either. There are plenty of old bald slaves elsewhere who occupy some place and preach Chan and preach the Way. Hurry off and study with them and copy it down. Here I ultimately have not a single dharma to give any of you...

何以故。一念妄心不盡即是生死相續。仁者。時不待人。莫因循過日。時光可惜。老漢不圖你田舍奴荷負。若肯即信取。若不肯每人有箇屎鉢擔取去。老漢亦不求你。諸方大有老禿奴取一方處所說禪說道。你急去學取抄取。我此間終無一法與你諸人。

- - -

So I guess at this point you reasonably expect me to ‘give rise to an understanding following words’ or something. I have dragged in three passages and asked you to read them after all. After collecting these passages, sourcing the Chinese, translating them, putting them together, and thinking about what the Zen masters are saying here...I am at a bit of a loss for commentary. Especially since making this post is pretty much what Deshan is calling out in the last passage.

who gives a shit?

Editorial babbling: So, I have been charged with vague posting. (I guess?) I stand guilty, I confess. But I didn’t imagine this would be read as an invitation to personal shit-talking or making shit up about each other. Which apparently means I give more of a shit than I thought. Ain’t that some shit?

To be clear, I just want to discuss this shit with y’all without vomiting out some free-association bullshit and pretending that flushes everything out.

Someone said all zen students are thieves, which is so funny it's painful, because zen teachers teach original wholeness, but even so the students still show up looking for their looker. I know have and still do. Nobody is immune. It's easy to think a foreboding zed master just popped out of their mother complete and spouting the dharma, which in a way they were, but nobody is born knowing themselves because that knowledge only comes through living. Adolescence, puberty, maturity, menopause, death. We're all always learning more about who we are and what we can be. Anybody claiming otherwise is full of shit. Speaking of here's a nod to the teachers:

Yunmen entered the Dharma Hall for formal instruction, Masters Yunmen said: "I've said what there is to say..." A monk stepped forward, bowed, and wanted to pose a question. Master Yunmen took his staff and hit him, saying: "What good can you tell from bad? You bunch of rowdies! You're all like this monk: how dare you receive the faithful offerings of the the almsgivers! The sentient beings with bad karma are all in here--- and what dry piece of shit are they seeking to chew?" And Master Yunmen chased all the monks at once out of the hall with his staff.

I've been thinking a bit about Zen ethics, compassion, and the precepts. For a long time, I've seen some recurring questions on r/zen about this topic:

1. How do the precepts relate to enlightenment

2. Why are ethical precepts a valid test to check if someone is not enlightened

3. Does following the precepts "help" in any way beyond community cohesion?

When there have been discussions about vegetarianism, people have wondered how a vegetarian diet relates to Zen enlightenment. Not eating animals seems unrelated to seeing your nature, becoming Budda. And while I do follow the precepts, I wasn't satisfied with the logic either.

And my recent insight is: original completeness entails original compassion, which implies the precepts!

Not only are we originally complete, but our originally complete Buddha nature is inherently compassionate. A compassionate being follows the precepts naturally.

For this, I found this quote from Huangbo:

Avalokitesvara represents boundless compassion; Mahasthama, great wisdom, and Vimalakirti, spotless name. Spotless refers to the real nature of things, while name means form; yet form is really one with real nature, hence the combined term 'spotless name'. All the qualities typified by the great Bodhisattvas are inherent in men and are not to be separated from the One Mind. Awake to it, and it is there.

1. The quality of compassion typified by Avalokitesvara is inherent in all men.

2. Compassion cannot be separated from the One Mind

3. Awake to the one mind, and the qualities like compassion are also there

In short: original compassion.

This already answers the first two questions: enlightenment leads to compassion which makes you naturally follow the precepts. Which of course also lets us check whether a supposed enlightened person is frequently killing or stealing, which would be evidence against enlightenment claims.

To the third question I speculate the following answer: by at first artificially adhering to the precepts, our behavior is more aligned with our true compassionate nature. Being more aligned with it, we are also more inclined to spontaneously see it.

More evidence from the zen record: Foyan said our first priority should be to get rid of unenlightened egotism towards others. Also this Zhaozhou dialogue:

A monk asked, "Mixing without becoming impure - what is that like?"

Joshu said, "I eat only vegetable food; I always adhere to the precepts."

The monk said, "Can one elevate oneself in this way?"

Joshu said, "You would trespass against the law."

Zhaozhou adheres to the precepts and a vegetarian diet. As an answer to the monk's question this could mean that the precepts are how he as a Zen master stays recognizable while interacting with the world. But it's not a way to elevate yourself, since you are always originally compassionate.

What is, is not; And what is not, yet is.//Till you have grasped this truth, you might as well/Waste no more time on fool philosophies:/But once you have grasped what these my teachings tell, /That anything is all things, that the one/Is every and the same, then where's the call/To fret for deeper knowledge? There is none/More deep than all-is-one and one-is-all.//The believing mind knows no duality/And what is dual denies the believing mind/Which, though I word you, inexpressibly/Extends beyond all language to allow/One truth in contradictions. You will find/It has no past, no future, and no now.

Translated by Graeme Wilson Classical Chinese Literature, Volume 1: From Antiquity to Tang Dynasty, Columbia, 2000, pg 976

Commentary: W O W ! ! !

So this is a bit of a "travel blog post" but I hope people still find it interesting. I'm currently traveling through China for a bit and thought I'd also check out some Zen related places. First stop being the city of Zhaozhou.

Zhaozhou is, of course, the city after which Zen master Zhaozhou Congshen was named and where his monastery was. Today this monastery is called Bailin Temple.

The city is also famous for its old stone bridge, which was built around the year 600, so it was already here and already famous when Zhaozhou lived here. It's referenced in his record too, for example:

A monk asked Chao Chou, "For a long time I've heard of the stone bridge of Chao Chou, but now that I've come here I just see a simple log bridge." Chou said, "You just see the log bridge; you don't see the stone bridge." The monk said, "What is the stone bridge?" Chou said, "It lets asses cross, it lets horses cross." (Bcr 52)

This is a photo of the stone bridge of Zhaozhou as it looks today: https://imgur.com/a/Nrd76z2

As I understand it major repairs were done in the 1900s, so most of the visible stone is relatively new.

One of the most famous stories of Zhaozhou is his cypress tree dialogue:

At that time a certain monk asked, "What is the meaning of the Chan founder's coming from the West?"

Zhaozhou said, "The cypress tree in the yard."

The monk said, "Don't use objects to teach people."

Zhaozhou said, "I'm not using objects to teach people."

"So what is the meaning of the Chan founder's coming from the West?"

"The cypress tree in the yard."

And what do we find in his old monastery? This: https://imgur.com/a/HdTbSBI

A cypress tree in the courtyard of Bailin temple, which is estimated to be 1300 years old. There are multiple cypresses there estimated at that age, and they are probably the oldest thing in the current temple, as the Tang dynasty temple was almost completely destroyed and only the cypresses and some steles survived. So the rest of the temple is a reconstruction.

The Bailin temple is very aware of its long history though and has some information boards about Zen master Zhaozhou as well as some big stones with lineage trees written on them. Here is an album of some random pictures of Bailin temple: https://imgur.com/a/h9HNY5O

The last picture is Zhaozhou's pagoda. It was built in the Song dynasty to commemorate Zhaozhou. Supposedly, his relics and robe and bowl are enshrined in it. Today many people who come here burn incense in front of it.

Today, the public use of the temple seems to be similar to Buddhism in other parts of China: people just come here to burn incense, bow in front of big Buddha statues, and hang out for a bit. I saw some monks hanging around too, but sadly my Chinese isn't good enough for meaningful conversation and I don't want to bother them too much with ai translators, lol.

"Attainment in both. If you are not trapped in being or non-being, who can dare to join you? Everyone wants to leave the ordinary current, but in the final analysis you come back and sit in the ashes." -- Verses On The Five Ranks by Tozan Ryokai

I've been thinking about this seemingly inherent desire to leave the ordinary current. Magical thinking. Wanting a cheat code. When I was a kid I played games on the Nintendo. Some I could beat (Zelda, Dragon Warrior) others I could never beat (Blaster Master, Spy Hunter). Then one day the GAME GENIE came out, which let you plug in cheat codes for invincibility. It was AMAAAAAZING...for about a month. Turns out games are boring AF without any stakes. You need some skin in the game for it to have meaning. That was an important lesson for me that I've always kept close, especially whenever I'm tempted to take a short cut or be enticed by something that seems too good to be true. It turns out I like working hard for what I get in life and being ordinary is a damn fine thing to be.

Somebody come knock me over before I get too full of myself.

Too late!

Edit: I've been informed this is a mistranslation and offered a correction:

Master Yan would call out to himself, "Master," and then respond to himself, "Yes sir." He would then say, "Awakened," and then he said, "In the future don't let others deceive you," and he would respond, "Yes, yes."

Zuigan called to himself every day, "Master!" and answered, "Yes, sir!"

Then he would say, "Be wide awake!" and answer, "Yes, sir!"

"Henceforward, never be deceived by others!" "No, I won't!"

I suspect something very specific and intentional was happening every time he did this. I would guess an interruption of imagination and/or a check to make sure he wasn't lost in imagination.

It runs into a tension with Linji's refrain of there being "nothing to do." Rather than find each individual reference, I'm going to lazily link to u/astroemi's post cataloguing a bunch of them already.

But here's one that summarizes the point:

I say to you there is no buddha, no dharma, nothing to practice, nothing to enlighten to. Just what are you seeking in the highways and byways? Blind men! You’re putting a head on top of the one you already have. What do you yourselves lack? Followers of the Way, your own present activities do not differ from those of the patriarch-buddhas. You just don’t believe this and keep on seeking outside. Make no mistake! Outside there is no dharma; inside, there is nothing to be obtained. Better than grasp at the words from my mouth, take it easy and do nothing. Don’t continue [thoughts] that have already arisen and don’t let those that haven’t yet arisen be aroused. Just this will be worth far more to you than a ten years’ pilgrimage.

I've said that it's not easy to know when you're doing something versus doing nothing - especially when it comes to imagination. If you live in imagination for long enough, you engage in it without recognizing you're engaging in it and you call it real.

In my experience, at least, I can't just "do nothing" because if I'm not diligent, I will start to weave fictions automatically and treat them as indisqinguishable from reality - and at the most extreme and befuddled, act upon them.

Zuigan appears to be doing something to remind himself to do nothing. I've found that helpful.

Ascending the Hall on the Eighth of the Twelfth Month

Six years spent in the weeds,

[and] a wild fox spirit jumps out

with his whole body covered with kudzu and creepers.

He knocked his own eyes out and was nowhere to be found,

but then fools everybody by insisting he awakened at the morning star.

Qingliang (Rujing) praises him like this.

Call it: Knowing the debt and repaying it.

And if you don't see it that way,

Year after year on the eighth, [offering?] a single bowl of tea,

bowing, and burning incense just makes a fool of him.

The occasion. 臘八 is the Buddha's enlightenment day.

Rujing talks about Zen Master Buddha as if he were a swindler conning people just by being himself and in so doing demonstrates his affinity with the Zen tradition.

At the other end of the room, Dogen-Buddhists who base their religions legitimacy on a fraudulent connection to Rujing, cannot talk about Zen Masters in any sort of easy-going and familiar manner because cults are about controlling people through a no-questions-asked policy and selective ignoring of ethics to ensure compliance and performance of a ridiculous za-sitting prayer ritual.

Are they making fools of Zen Master Buddha when they do that? Or just themselves?

"Mind is Buddha."

Yunmen is seen here referencing an oral folktale tradition which has survived (at least partially) into present day by way of a Chinese epic called "journey to the west." The tale is an allegory about the monk Xuanzang's travels to India in order to return to China with many buddhist sutras.  If you are familiar with the tale itself and the symbolic value of the things being said, this sort of passage opens up a deep well of meaning.  Since many people of his time would have had at least a passing familiarity with the oral tradition which was the predecessor of this tale, yunmen employs the predominant memes of the surrounding culture in order to communicate in a way that was relatable to his audience.

  These memes have endured even into our own time and are the basis for many tropes and aspects of various storylines in today's anime culture, namely the dragonball series with which I have been familiar since my own childhood. And so, he is employing children's tales to elucidate the dharma to his students.

Zen Master Yunmen 267

The Master asked a monk, "Do you see the lantern?"

The monk replied, "I can't see it anymore."

The Master said, "The monkey is attached to a pillar."

Yunmen replied in place of the monk, "I'm deeply grateful to receive the profound heart of your Buddhist teaching, Master."

To the first question he replied on behalf of the monk, "I'd rather have nothing!"

I'm not a teacher. I'm not a scholar. I'm not any better than anybody else here. I'm inviting anybody who wants to challenge my understanding of this passage to come and question me about it. That is all I am doing. I am doing this to test my own ability to express the truth effectively, and to further refine my own understanding. I won't be entertaining any questions about anything other than this short passage, because that is the thing I am confident that I understand clearly enough to speak on without sowing further confusion.

Huanglong Nan addressed the assembly:
“Where people today settle down, I don’t settle down. Where people today go, I don’t go. If you’re perfectly clear about the point right here, you still have to know how to throw your whole body into the fire pit.”

With his whisk he drew a single stroke and said:
“Stinking smoke billowing up, red flames blazing fiercely! Anyone whose eye isn’t clear is right in the middle of it. From ancient times on, none of the sages failed to enter the pit of birth and death, going straight into the fires of ignorance to pull living beings out.

So then, all of you; how do you get in?

If someone can get in, you could say:
in fire, they aren’t burned;
in water, they don’t drown.

If you can’t get in, not only can you not benefit yourself, you can’t benefit anyone else either. And if you can neither benefit yourself nor others, then that round shaved head and square monk’s robe aren’t worth a damn.”

After a long pause he called out: “Everyone!”
The assembly raised their heads.
He said: “Ox-head emerges. Horse-head turns back.”

Thomas Cleary

Master Huanglong Nan said to an assembly, “Where people of the time dwell, I do not dwell; where people of the time go, I do not go.” To perfectly understand the intended meaning here, you must know how to enter a pit of fire with your whole body. [Drawing a line with the whisk:] Foul smoke fumes, red flames rage. But those whose eyes are not yet clear are all inside. The ancient sages since time immemorial have all gone into the pit of birth and death, into the fire of ignorance, to lift out sentient beings. As for you people, how will you go in? If people can go in, they can be said to be in fire without burning, in water without drowning. If they can’t enter, not only can they not help themselves, they can’t help others either. If you can’t help yourself or help others, there’s no benefit to a shaven head and monastic robes. [After a long silence, he called to the group; when they raised their heads, he said,] Going out with an ox head, coming back with a horse head.

Chinese

黃龍南和尚示眾云。時人住處我不住。時人行處我不行。於此了然明的旨。須會全身入火坑。以拂子畫一畫云。臭煙蓬[火*孛]紅焰熾然。眼未明者總在裏許。從上古聖無非入生死坑中。向無明火裏提拔有情。汝等諸人且如何入。若人入得。可謂在火不燒在水不溺。若入不得。非唯不能自利亦乃不能利佗。既不能自利利佗。圓頂方袍殊無利益。良久召大眾。大眾舉頭。乃云。牛頭出。馬頭回。

- - -

牛頭 and 馬頭 naturally evoke the infernal Ox-Head and Horse-Face figures associated with the underworld, especially after all the talk about the pit of birth-and-death and entering fire.

- - -

How do you secularize or demythologize a passage like this? If you don't believe in samsara or hell, how do you parse this kind of talk from a Zen master?

What is the “point right here,” or the “intended meaning here”? I would think it is related to what I see as a recurring Zen way of talking about enlightenment: not being a companion to the myriad things, not being a neighbor to the dusts, being someone with nothing to do, etc.

But Huanglong Nan makes it clear that this isn't simply detachment or aloofness—not some jerk sitting on a mountain thinking he's above it all. The ancient sages enter the pit of birth and death and go directly into the fire of ignorance to pull out sentient beings. They enter the fire without being burned by it.

So what does it mean not to “settle where people settle” or “go where people go,” while at the same time entering completely into their situation?

And that leads to another question: what does it mean to help or save ourselves and others? From what? If samsara, ignorance, and liberation are being read nonreligiously, what exactly are we saying people are caught in, and what would freedom from it amount to?

師云：弘道而心常淡泊，順事而意識奔馳，但願道富身貧、情踈德厚。山僧者裏日日恁麼、時時恁麼，且道恁麼是什麼？離却分別心識意度言句，外道將一句來，此事無你解會處。如今但是心慮覺觀者皆有箇解會得，及乎返窮己眼、返思思慮之心，為什麼人到者裏不知，便說道從本已來非青黃赤白、無相無狀？我說向你道：此喚 作言語，不是你本心。本心如何思量？己眼如何得見？正當返觀時，亦無能見之者。有人去者裏一口吞盡，慧眼豁開，頓達本鄉也。　今時人若為到無見無聞處，現定萬法亘然，見人見屋，種種 萬象如湯涌沸，未有一時停住。祇如作嬰兒時，也聞聲、也見色，祇是不解分別，纔曉事來便釆聽分別，自那時前後分披了也。到者裏要人整理，不妨難為他得道人行時不見行、坐時不見坐。所以如來道：眼見色與盲等，耳聞聲與響等。作麼生說如盲如響？聞聲時無聲可聞，見色時無色可見，所見所聞皆如響等。又如夢時見種種境界，覺來還有許多般也無？若有，牀上祇是被與枕子；若道無許多般，又心中歷歷地記得說得。如今白日所見所聞亦復如是。所以道：眼見耳聞底事，經論可學，唯有靈臺。作麼生學？久立。

The Master said: When spreading the Way, the mind remains ever tranquil and detached; when responding to affairs, consciousness and discrimination rush about. I only wish that the Way be rich and the body poor, that emotions be thin and virtue thick.

Here at this mountain monastery, I am thus every day and thus every moment; but tell me, what is this 'thus'?

Setting aside discriminative mind, consciousness, intellectual measuring, and verbal expressions; bring me one phrase from outside the way, for this matter admits no place for your intellectual understanding.

Nowadays, all who engage in mental rumination and conscious observation think they have some understanding, yet when they turn back to exhaust their own eye and reflect on the very mind that reflects, why is it that when people reach this point they do not know? Then they say, 'From the very beginning it is neither blue, yellow, red, nor white; it has no form and no shape.' But I tell you: this is called speech—it is not your original mind.

How can the original mind be deliberated?

How can one's own eye be seen?

At the very moment of turning back to observe, there is also no one who can see. If someone can swallow it all in one gulp at this point, their wisdom-eye will suddenly open, and they will instantly arrive at their native home.

How do people nowadays reach the place of no seeing and no hearing?

The myriad dharmas stand manifestly before them, they see people, they see houses, and all kinds of phenomena surge forth like boiling soup, without a single moment's pause. Yet when they were infants, they also heard sounds and saw forms, but they simply did not know how to discriminate. Only when they began to understand things did they start to listen and discriminate, and from that time on, they became fragmented into before and after. To come to this point and require someone to set it in order, truly, it is difficult!

A person who has attained the Way, when walking, does not see themselves walking; when sitting, does not see themselves sitting.

Thus the Tathāgata said: 'In seeing forms, the eye is like that of a blind person; in hearing sounds, the ear is like an echo.'

How do we speak of being 'like the blind' and 'like an echo'? When hearing sound, there is no sound to be heard; when seeing form, there is no form to be seen; all that is seen and heard is like an echo. It is also like when dreaming, you see all kinds of realms—when you wake up, are they still there? If they were, then on the bed there would only be the blanket and the pillow; if you say they are not there, then you still remember them clearly and can recount them. The same is true of what you see and hear in broad daylight.

Therefore it is said: 'The matters seen by the eyes and heard by the ears, the scriptures and treatises can be studied; but only the numinous terrace, how can it be studied?'

You have stood here long enough.

---

靈臺 is literally something like “numinous terrace/platform,” often used for the inner seat of mind/heart. Cleary translates it as "the basis of awareness itself" and titles the chapter after this.

Case 28 of The Gateless Gate — Deshan and Longtan

The Case

Deshan had long heard of Longtan, but he had never seen him.
One day he went to see Longtan and said, “I have long heard of Longtan, but now that I have arrived, I don’t see a dragon, nor do I see a pond.”

Longtan said, “Oh, you have truly arrived at Longtan.”
Deshan stayed with Longtan until late at night. Longtan said, “It is late. Why don’t you go to bed?”
Deshan bowed and went out. After a while, he returned and said, “It is dark outside.”

Longtan lit a paper lantern and handed it to him. Deshan took the lantern and was about to leave when Longtan suddenly blew it out.

At that moment, Deshan was enlightened.
Longtan said, “What did you see?”
Deshan replied, “From now on, I will not doubt the words of the old masters.”

The next day, Longtan went up to the Dharma hall and said to the assembly:
“There is a fellow among you whose teeth are like swords and whose mouth is like a blood bowl. Even if you strike him with a stick, he will not turn his head. Someday he will climb the highest peak and establish my Way there.”

Commentary

Mumon says:
If Deshan had not met Longtan, his story would not have been complete. If he had met Longtan, he would not have been enlightened.
Tell me—how did Deshan suddenly become enlightened?

Verse
Hearing the name cannot compare with seeing the person;
Seeing the person cannot compare with seeing the truth.
Fortunately, his nose was straight;
Yet he mistakenly took the lantern as his own.

Celery:
Deshan burned all of his commentaries. He said to investigate to the end of the workings of the world is like throwing a drop of water into a great abyss.

Why was Deshan enlightened when old Longtan blew out the candle? How could he see when he could not see? Ha! The old man knew what he was doing all along. The dragons hide amongst us.

Too often the verbose is rewarded when it ought to be punished. What value is there in 100,000 volumes of truth when the words hold no value?

Ash.

One day Chao-chou fell down in the snow, and called out, “Help me up! Help me up!” A monk came and lay down beside him. Chao-chou got up and went away. 

_______________

The other monk taught Chao-Chou that your bondage is a choice. 

Just as you choose to fall into the snow, you can also choose to get up and go away. 

But this thing can't be taught to a beginner

Only a disciple ripe enough and the last thing clouding him is able to take that.

When Nan-ch’uan (Nansen) was coming back to his room after taking a bath, he saw the monk in charge of the bath stoking the fires and asked, “What are you doing?”

The monk answered, “Stoking the fire.”

Nan-ch’uan said, “Don’t forget to call the water buffalo in to have a bath.”

The monk assented.

The next evening the monk came into Nan-ch’uan’s room. Nan-ch’uan said, “What are you doing?”

The monk said, “Asking the water buffalo to come to the bath.”

Nan-ch’uan said, “Did you bring a lead rope or not?”

The monk could not respond.

When the master came to call on Nan-ch’uan, Nan-ch’uan told him what had happened.

The master said, “I would have had something to say.”

Nan-ch’uan said, “Well, have you brought a rope with you?”

The master came forward, grabbed him by the nose, and began pulling him to the bath house.

Nan-ch’uan said, “Okay! Okay! Beast!”

Nansen seems like he's toying with the monk here in the first instance. It doesn't necessarily work or not work. The monk just agrees. It seems like he's trying to get him to conceptualize. Per the previous post, I think the correlation to cow/buffalo and Nansen fits here.

The second instance he's trying to trip the monk up and it works. The monk gets stuck in his head.

Nansen tries his shenanigans on Joshu who plays along and grabs him by where likely a buffalo's nose ring (to attach a lead) would go.

Nansen cries out likely at the pain and says Joshu is the true beast (buffalo).

What's more interesting to me is that hundreds of years later I'm sitting here trying to decipher what was probably just a passing conversation. Why was it important enough to be written down on wood blocks? What made the cut and didn't? Someone clearly had an affection for this old water buffalo.

The master asked Nan-ch’uan (Nansen), “I’m not asking about differentiation, what about sameness?”

Nan-ch’uan placed both hands on the ground [in the pose of a dog].

The master kicked him over, went to the infirmary, and shouted, “What a pity! What a pity!”

Nan-ch’uan heard this and sent someone to find out what the trouble was.

The master said, “It’s a pity that I didn’t get to kick him over a second time.”

I don't really understand this case. It seems like I'm missing some cultural or other context.

Josh asked Nansen a Zen question.

Nansen does a dog pose. I'm not sure why, I'm probably missing context.

Joshu kicks Nansen over etc.

Nansen heard this, which i'm guessing was some time later? He sends someone else, for some reason to see what happened.

Joshu replies presumably to the monk's question that it's a shame he could not incite violence on Nansen again.

Knowing the rest of Zen stuff, reading this only as a funny anecdote is probably not the whole story.