Bussho

[22]

仏性

BUSSHO

The Buddha-nature

Butsu means Buddha and sho means nature, so bussho means Buddha-nature. The Chinese characters read in Japanese as bussho represent the meaning of the Sanskrit word buddhatā, or Buddha-nature; this was usually understood as the potential we have to attain the truth, or as something which we have inherently and which grows naturally day by day. But Master Dogen was not satisfied by such interpretations. In his view, the Buddha-nature is neither a potential nor a natural attribute, but a state or condition of body and mind at a present moment. Therefore, he saw the Buddha-nature neither as something that we might realize in the future, nor as something that we have inherently in our body and mind. From this standpoint, Master Dogen affirmed and at the same time denied the proposition “We all have the Buddha-nature.” He also affirmed and at the same time denied the proposition “We all don’t have the Buddha-nature.” At first sight, these views appear contradictory, but through his dialectic explanation of the Buddha-nature in this chapter, Master Dogen succeeded in interpreting the concept of the Buddha-nature from the standpoint of action or reality.

[4] Śākyamuni Buddha says:

All living beings totally have¹ the Buddha-nature: The Tathāgata abides [in them] constantly, without changing at all.²

This is the turning of the Dharma wheel, as a lion’s roar, of our great Master Śākyamuni. At the same time it is the brains and eyes of all the buddhas and all the patriarchs. It has been learned in practice for 2,190 years (it now being the 2nd year of the Japanese era of Ninji),³ through barely fifty generations of rightful successors (until the late Master Tendo Nyojo).⁴ Twenty-eight patriarchs in India⁵ have dwelt in it and maintained it from one generation to the next. Twenty-three patriarchs in China⁶ have dwelt in it and maintained it from one age to the next. The Buddhist patriarchs in the ten directions have each dwelt in it and maintained it. What is the point of the World-honored One’s words that “All living beings totally exist¹ as the Buddha-nature”? It is the words “This is something ineffable coming like this”⁷ turning the Dharma wheel. Those called “living beings,” or called “the sentient,” or called “all forms of life,” or called “all creatures,” are living beings and are all forms of Existence. In short, Total Existence is the Buddha-nature, and the perfect totality of Total Existence is called “living beings.” At just this moment, the inside and outside of living beings are the Total Existence of the Buddha-nature. The state is more than only the skin, flesh, bones, and marrow that are transmitted one-to-one, because you have got my skin, flesh, bones, and marrow.⁸ Remember, the Existence [described] now, which is totally possessed by the Buddha-nature, is beyond the “existence” of existence and non-existence. Total Existence is the Buddha’s words, the Buddha’s tongue, the Buddhist patriarchs’ eyes, and the nostrils of a patch-robed monk. The words “Total Existence” are utterly beyond beginning existence, beyond original existence, beyond fine existence, and so on. How much less could they describe conditioned existence or illusory existence? They are not connected with “mind and circumstances” or with “essence and form” and the like. This being so, object-and-subject as living beings-and-Total Existence is completely beyond ability based on karmic accumulation, beyond the random occurrence of circumstances, beyond accordance with the Dharma, and beyond mystical powers and practice and experience. If the Total Existence of living beings were [ability] based on karmic accumulation, were the random occurrence of circumstances, were accordance with the Dharma, and so on, then the saints’ experience of the truth, the buddhas’ state of bodhi, and the Buddhist patriarchs’ eyes, would also be ability based on karmic accumulation, the occurrence of circumstances, and accordance with the Dharma. That is not so. The whole Universe is utterly without objective molecules: here and now there is no second person at all. [At the same time] “No person has ever recognized the direct cutting of the root”; for “When does the busy movement of karmic consciousness ever cease?”⁹ [Total Existence] is beyond existence that arises through random circumstances; for “The entire Universe has never been hidden.”¹⁰ “The entire Universe has never been hidden” does not necessarily mean that the substantial world is Existence itself. [At the same time] “The entire Universe is my possession” is the wrong view of non-Buddhists. [Total Existence] is beyond originally-existing existence; for it pervades the eternal past and pervades the eternal present. It is beyond newly-appearing existence; for it does not accept a single molecule. It is beyond separate instances of existence; for it is inclusive perception. It is beyond the “existence” of “beginningless existence”; for it is something ineffable coming like this. It is beyond the “existence” of “newly arising existence”; for the everyday mind is the truth.¹¹ Remember, in the midst of Total Existence it is difficult for living beings to meet easy convenience. When understanding of Total Existence is like this, Total Existence is the state of penetrating to the substance and getting free.

[10] Hearing the word “Buddha-nature,” many students have misunderstood it to be like the “Self” described by the non-Buddhist Senika.¹² This is because they do not meet people, they do not meet themselves, and they do not meet with a teacher. They vacantly consider mind, will, or consciousness—which is the movement of wind and fire¹³—to be the Buddha-nature’s enlightened knowing and enlightened understanding. Who has ever said that enlightened knowing and enlightened understanding are present in the Buddha-nature? Those who realize enlightenment, those who know, are buddhas, but the Buddha-nature is beyond enlightened knowing and enlightened understanding. Moreover, in describing the buddhas as those who realize and those who know, we are not describing the wrong views randomly expressed by those others as realization and knowing. And we are not describing the movement of wind and fire as realization and knowing.¹⁴ One or two concrete manifestations of a buddha or concrete manifestations of a patriarch are just realization and knowing. For many ages venerable predecessors have been to India and back and have instructed human beings and gods. From the Han to the Sung dynasties they have been as [numerous as] rice plants, flax plants, bamboo, and reeds, but many of them have considered the movement of wind and fire to be the knowing and realization of the Buddha-nature. It is pitiful that, because their pursuit of the truth became further and further removed, they are guilty of this error. Later students and beginners in Buddhism today should not be like that. We learn realization and knowing, but realization and knowing are beyond movement. We learn movement, but movement is not the state like this.¹⁵ If we are able to understand real movement, we will be able to understand real knowing and understanding. Buddha and nature have arrived at that place and have arrived at this place.¹⁶ The Buddha-nature is always Total Existence, for Total Existence is the Buddha-nature. Total Existence is not smashed into hundreds of bits and pieces, and Total Existence is not a single rail of iron. Because it is the holding up of a fist, it is beyond large and small. What already has been called “the Buddha-nature” should not be equated with “saints” and should not be equated with “the Buddha-nature.” [But] there is one group which thinks as follows: The Buddha-nature is like the seed of a plant or a tree. As the rain of Dharma waters it again and again, its buds and sprouts begin to grow. Then twigs, leaves, flowers, and fruit abound, and the fruit once more bears seeds. Views like this are the sentimental thinking of the common man. If we do hold such views, we should investigate that seeds, and flowers and fruits, are all separate instances of the naked mind.¹⁷ In fruits there are seeds. The seeds, though unseen, produce roots, stalks, and so on. Though they do not gather anything to themselves, they grow into a profusion of twigs, branches, and trunks. They are beyond discussion of inside and outside; and in Time, past and present, they are not void.¹⁸ Thus, even if we rely on the view of the common man, roots, stalks, branches, and leaves may all be the Buddha-nature which is born with them, which dies with them, and which is just the same as their Total Existence.

[14] The Buddha says,

Wanting to know the meaning of the Buddha-nature,
We should just reflect¹⁹ real time, causes and circumstances.
When the time has come,
The Buddha-nature is manifest before us.²⁰

This “wanting to know the meaning of the Buddha-nature” does not only mean knowing. It means wanting to practice it, wanting to experience it, wanting to preach it, and wanting to forget it. Such preaching, practicing, experiencing, forgetting, misunderstanding, not misunderstanding, and so on, are all the causes and circumstances of real time. To reflect the causes and circumstances of real time is to reflect using the causes and circumstances of real time; it is mutual reflection through a whisk, a staff, and so on. On the basis of “imperfect wisdom,” “faultless wisdom,” or the wisdom of “original awakening,” “fresh awakening,” “free awakening,” “right awakening,” and so on, [the causes and circumstances of real time] can never be reflected. Just reflecting¹⁹ is not connected with the subject that reflects or the object of reflection and it should not be equated with right reflection, wrong reflection, and the like: it is just reflection here and now. Because it is just reflection here and now it is beyond subjective reflection and it is beyond objective reflection. It is the oneness of real time and causes and circumstances itself; it is transcendence of causes and circumstances; it is the Buddha-nature itself—the Buddha-nature rid of its own substance; it is Buddha as Buddha himself; and it is the natural function as the natural function itself. People in many ages from the ancient past to the present have thought that the words “when the time has come…” are about waiting for a time in the future when the Buddha-nature might be manifest before us. [They think that,] continuing their practice with this attitude, they will naturally meet the time when the Buddha-nature is manifest before them. They say that, because the time has not come, even if they visit a teacher and ask for Dharma, and even if they pursue the truth and make effort, [the Buddha-nature] is not manifest before them. Taking such a view they vainly return to the world of crimson dust²¹ and vacantly stare at the Milky Way. People like this may be a variety of naturalistic non-Buddhists. The words “Wanting to know the meaning of the Buddha-nature” mean, for example, “Really knowing the meaning of the Buddha-nature just here and now.”²² “Should just reflect real time, causes and circumstances” means “Know causes and circumstances as real time, just here and now!” If you want to know this Buddha-nature, remember, causes and circumstances as real time are just it. “When the time has come” means “The time has come already! What could there be to doubt?” Even if there is a time of doubt, I leave it as it is—it is the Buddha-nature returning to me. Remember, “the time having come” describes not spending any time in vain through the twelve hours: “when it has come” is like saying “it has come already.” And because the time has come, “Buddha-nature” does not arrive. Thus, now that the time has come, this is just the manifestation before us of the Buddha-nature, whose truth, in other words, is self-evident. In summary, there has never been any time which was not time having come, nor any Buddha-nature which was not the Buddha-nature manifesting itself before us.

[19] The twelfth patriarch, the Venerable Aśvaghoṣa, in preaching the Ocean of Buddha-nature to the thirteenth patriarch,²³ says,

The mountains, rivers, and the Earth,
All relying on it, are constructed.
Samādhi and the six powers
Depending upon it, manifest themselves.²⁴

So these mountains, rivers, and Earth are all the Ocean of Buddha-nature. As to the meaning of “All relying on it, are constructed,” just the moment of construction itself is the mountains, rivers, and Earth. He has actually said “All are constructed relying on it”; remember, the concrete form of the Ocean of Buddha-nature is like this: it should never be related with inside, outside, and middle. This being so, to look at mountains and rivers is to look at the Buddha-nature. And to look at the Buddha-nature is to look at a donkey’s jaw or a horse’s nose. We understand, and we transcend the understanding, that all rely means total reliance, and reliance on the total.²⁵ “Samādhi and the six powers manifest themselves depending upon this.” Remember, the manifestation, the coming into the present, of the various states of samādhi, is in the same state of all relying on the Buddha-nature. The dependence upon this, and the non-dependence upon this, of all six powers, are both in the state of all relying on the Buddha-nature. The six mystical powers are not merely the six mystical powers mentioned in the Āgama-sūtras.²⁶ Six describes three and three before and three and three behind²⁷ as the six mystical-power-pāramitās.²⁸ So do not investigate the six mystical powers as “Clear, clear are the hundred things; clear, clear is the will of the Buddhist patriarchs.”²⁹ Even if the six mystical powers hold us back, they are still governed by the Ocean of Buddha-nature.

[22] The fifth patriarch, Zen Master Daiman,³⁰ is a man from Obai in the Kishu district.³¹ Born without a father, he attains the truth as a child. Thereafter he becomes “the one who practices the truth by planting pine trees.” Originally he plants pine trees on Seizan mountain in the Kishu district. The fourth patriarch happens to visit there, and he tells the practitioner, “I would like to transmit the Dharma to you. But you are already too old. If you return [to this world] I will wait for you.” The Master [Daiman] agrees. At last he is conceived in the womb of a daughter of the Shu family, who, the story goes, abandons [the baby] in the dirty water of a harbor. A mystical being protects him, and no harm comes to him for seven days. Then [the family] retrieves [the baby] and looks after him. When the boy reaches seven years of age, on a street in Obai he meets the fourth patriarch, Zen Master Dai-i.³² The Patriarch sees that, though only a small child, the Master has an exceptionally shaped skull, and he is no ordinary child. When the Patriarch meets him, he asks, “What is your name?”

The Master answers, “I have a name, but it is not an ordinary name.”

The Patriarch says, “What name is it?”

The Master answers, “It is Buddha-nature.”

The Patriarch says, “You are without the Buddha-nature.”

The Master replies, “The Buddha-nature is emptiness, so we call it being without.”

The [fourth] Patriarch recognizes that he is a vessel of the Dharma and makes him into an attendant monk. Later [the fourth patriarch] transmits to him the right-Dharma-eye treasury. [The fifth patriarch] lives on the East Mountain of Obai, mightily promoting the profound customs.

[25] Thus, when we thoroughly investigate the words of these ancestral masters, there is meaning in the fourth patriarch’s saying “What is your name.”³³ In the past there were people [described as] “A person of What country” and there were names [described as] “a What name”—[one person] was stating to another, “Your name is What!”³⁴ It was like saying, for example, “I am like that, and you are also like that.”³⁵

The fifth patriarch says, “I have a name, but it is not an ordinary name.” In other words, “Existence is the name”³⁶—not an ordinary name, for an ordinary name is not right for Existence here and now.³⁷

In the fourth patriarch’s words, “What name is it?,”³⁸ What means This, and he has dealt with This as What, which is a name. The realization of What is based on This, and the realization of This is the function of What. The name is This, and is What. We make it into mugwort tea, make it into green tea, and make it into everyday tea and meals. The fifth patriarch says, “It is Buddha-nature.” The point here is that This is the Buddha-nature. Because it is What, it is in the state of Buddha. How could the investigation of This have been limited to naming it What? Even when This is not right,³⁹ it is already the Buddha-nature. Thus, This is What, and it is Buddha; and at the same time, when it has become free and has been bared, it is always a name. Just such a name is Shu. But it is not received from a father, it is not received from a grandfather, and it is not the duplication of a mother’s family name. How could it be equated with a bystander?⁴⁰

The fourth patriarch says, “You are without the Buddha-nature.” These words proclaim that “You are not just anyone, and I leave [your name] up to you, but, being without, you are the Buddha-nature!”⁴¹ Remember the following, and learn it: At what moment of the present can we be, without, the Buddha-nature? Is it that at the start of Buddhist life⁴² we are, without, the Buddha-nature? Is it that in the ascendant state of Buddha we are, without, the Buddha-nature? Do not shut out clarification of the seven directions, and do not grope for attainment of the eight directions! Being without the Buddha-nature, can be learned, for example, as a moment of samādhi. We should ask, and should assert, whether when the Buddha-nature becomes buddha it is without the Buddha-nature, and when the Buddha-nature first establishes the mind it is without the Buddha-nature. We should make outdoor pillars ask, we should ask outdoor pillars, and we should make the Buddha-nature ask, this question. Thus, the words “being without the Buddha-nature” can be heard coming from the distant room of the fourth patriarch. They are seen and heard in Obai, they are spread throughout Joshu district, and they are exalted on Dai-i [mountain].⁴³ We must unfailingly apply ourselves to the words “being without the Buddha-nature.” Do not be hesitant. Though we should trace an outline of being without the Buddha-nature, it has the standard which is What, the real time which is You, the devotion to the moment which is This, and the name, common to all, which is Shu: it is direct pursuit itself.

The fifth patriarch says, “The Buddha-nature is emptiness,⁴⁴ so we call it being without.”⁴⁵ This clearly expresses that emptiness is not non-existence.⁴⁶ To express that the Buddha-nature is emptiness, we do not say it is half a pound and we do not say it is eight ounces, but we use the words “being without.” We do not call it “emptiness” because it is void, and we do not call it “being without” because it does not exist; because the Buddha-nature is emptiness, we call it “being without.”⁴⁷ So real instances of being without are the standard for expressing “emptiness,” and emptiness has the power to express “being without.” This emptiness is beyond the emptiness of “matter is just emptiness.”⁴⁸ [At the same time,] “matter is just emptiness” describes neither matter being forcibly made into emptiness nor emptiness being divided up to produce matter. It may describe emptiness in which emptiness is just emptiness. “Emptiness in which emptiness is just emptiness” describes one stone in space.⁴⁹ This being so, the fourth patriarch and the fifth patriarch pose questions and make assertions about the Buddha-nature being without, about the Buddha-nature as emptiness, and about the Buddha-nature as Existence.

[31] When the sixth patriarch in China, Zen Master Daikan of Sokei-zan mountain,⁵⁰ first visited Obai-zan mountain, the fifth patriarch,⁵¹ the story goes, asks him, “Where are you from?”

The sixth patriarch says, “I am a man from south of the Peaks.”⁵²

The fifth patriarch says, “What do you want to get by coming here?”

The sixth patriarch says, “I want to become buddha.”

The fifth patriarch says, “A man from south of the Peaks is without the Buddha-nature. How can you expect to become buddha?”⁵³

[32] These words “A man from south of the Peaks is without the Buddha-nature” do not mean that a man from south of the Peaks does not have the Buddha-nature, and do not mean that a man from south of the Peaks has the Buddha-nature. They mean that the man from south of the Peaks, being without, is the Buddha-nature. “How can you expect to become buddha?” means “What kind of becoming buddha are you expecting?” Generally, the past masters who have clarified the truth of the Buddha-nature are few. It is beyond the various teachings of the Āgama-sūtras and it cannot be known by teachers of sutras and commentaries: it is transmitted one-to-one by none other than the descendants of the Buddhist Patriarch. The truth of the Buddha-nature is that we are not equipped with the Buddha-nature before we realize the state of buddha; we are equipped with it following realization of the state of buddha. The Buddha-nature and realization of buddha inevitably experience the same state together. We should thoroughly investigate and consider this truth. We should consider it and learn it in practice for thirty years or twenty years. It is not understood by [bodhisattvas] in the ten sacred stages or the three clever stages. To say “living beings have the Buddha-nature,” or “living beings are without the Buddha-nature,” is this truth. To learn in practice that [the Buddha-nature] is something which is present following realization of buddha, is accurate and true. [Teaching] which is not learned like this is not the Buddha-Dharma. Without being learned like this, the Buddha-Dharma could not have reached us today. Without clarifying this truth we neither clarify, nor see and hear, the realization of buddha. This is why the fifth patriarch, in teaching the other, tells him, “People⁵⁴ from south of the Peaks, being without, are the Buddha-nature.”⁵⁵ When we first meet Buddha and hear the Dharma, [the teaching] that is difficult to get and difficult to hear is “Living beings, being without, are the Buddha-nature.” In sometimes following [good] counselors and sometimes following the sutras, what we should be glad to hear is “Living beings, being without, are the Buddha-nature.” Those who are not satisfied in seeing, hearing, realizing, and knowing that “All living beings, being without, are the Buddha-nature,” have never seen, heard, realized, or known the Buddha-nature. When the sixth patriarch earnestly seeks to become buddha, the fifth patriarch is able to make the sixth patriarch become buddha—without any other expression and without any other skillful means—just by saying “A man from south of the Peaks, being without, is the Buddha-nature.” Remember, saying and hearing the words “being without the Buddha-nature” is the direct path to becoming buddha. In sum, just at the moment of being without the Buddha-nature, we become buddha at once. Those who have neither seen and heard nor expressed being without the Buddha-nature have not become buddha.

[35] The sixth patriarch says,⁵⁶ “People have south and north, but the Buddha-nature is without south and north.” We should take this expression and make effort to get inside the words. We should reflect on the words “south and north” with naked mind. The words of the sixth patriarch’s expression of the truth have meaning in them: they include a point of view that “People become buddha, but the Buddha-nature cannot become buddha”—does the sixth patriarch recognize this or not? Receiving a fraction of the superlative power of restriction⁵⁷ present in the expression of the truth “being without the Buddha-nature,” as expressed by the fourth patriarch and the fifth patriarch, Kāśyapa Buddha and Śākyamuni Buddha and other buddhas possess the ability, in becoming buddha and in preaching Dharma, to express “totally having the Buddha-nature.” How could the having of totally having not receive the Dharma from the being without in which there is no “being without”? So the words being without the Buddha-nature can be heard coming from the distant rooms of the fourth patriarch and the fifth patriarch. At this time, if the sixth patriarch were a person of the fact, he would strive to consider these words “being without the Buddha-nature.” Setting aside for a while the “being without” of “having and being without,” he should ask, “Just what is the Buddha-nature?” He should inquire, “What concrete thing is the Buddha-nature?” People today also, when they have heard of the Buddha-nature, do not ask further, “What is the Buddha-nature?” They seem only to discuss the meaning of the Buddha-nature’s existence, non-existence, and so on. This is too hasty. In sum, the “being without” which belongs to various denials of existence should be studied under the being without of being without the Buddha-nature. We should sift through two times and three times, for long ages, the sixth patriarch’s words, “People have south and north, but the Buddha-nature is without south and north.” Power may be present just in the sieve.⁵⁸ We should quietly take up and let go of the sixth patriarch’s words “People have south and north, but the Buddha-nature is without south and north.” Stupid people think, “The human world has south and north because it is hindered by physical substance, whereas the Buddha-nature, being void and dissolute, is beyond discussion of south and north.” Those who guess that the sixth patriarch said this may be powerless dimwits. Casting aside this wrong understanding, we should directly proceed with diligent practice.

[38] The sixth patriarch preaches to disciple Gyosho,⁵⁹ “That without constancy is the Buddha-nature. That which has constancy is the mind that divides all dharmas into good and bad.”⁶⁰

“That without constancy”⁶¹ expressed by the sixth patriarch is beyond the supposition of non-Buddhists, the two vehicles, and the like. Founding patriarchs and latest offshoots among non-Buddhists and the two vehicles are without constancy, though they cannot perfectly realize it. Thus, when that without constancy itself preaches, practices, and experiences that without constancy, all may be that without constancy. If people can now be saved by the manifestation of our own body, we manifest at once our own body and preach for them the Dharma.⁶² This is the Buddha-nature. Further, it may be sometimes the manifestation of a long Dharma body and sometimes the manifestation of a short Dharma body. Everyday⁶³ saints are that without constancy and everyday commoners are that without constancy. The idea that everyday commoners and saints cannot be the Buddha-nature may be a stupid view of small thinking and a narrow view of the intellect. Buddha is a bit of body, and nature is a bit of action.⁶⁴ On this basis, the sixth patriarch says “That without constancy is the Buddha-nature.” “The constant” is the unchanging. The meaning of “the unchanging” is as follows: even though we turn it into the separating subject and transform it into the separated object, because it is not necessarily connected with the traces of leaving and coming, it is the constant.⁶⁵ In sum, that without constancy of grass, trees, and forests is just the Buddha-nature. And that without constancy of the body-and-mind of a human being is the Buddha-nature itself. National lands and mountains and rivers are that without constancy because they are the Buddha-nature. The truth of anuttara-samyaksaṅbodhi, because it is the Buddha-nature, is that without constancy. The great state of parinirvāṇa, because it is that without constancy, is the Buddha-nature. The various people of small views of the two vehicles, together with scholars of the tripiṭaka who teach sutras and commentaries, and the like, might be astonished, doubting, and afraid at these words of the sixth patriarch. If they are astonished or doubting, they are demons and non-Buddhists.

[42] The fourteenth patriarch, the Venerable Ryuju, called Nāgārjuna⁶⁶ in Sanskrit, and called either Ryuju, Ryusho, or Ryumo in Chinese,⁶⁷ is a man from western India, and he goes to southern India. Most people of that nation believe in karma for happiness. The Venerable One preaches for them the subtle Dharma. Those who hear him say to each other, “The most important thing in the human world is that people possess karma for happiness. Yet he talks idly of the Buddha-nature. Who can see such a thing?”

The Venerable One says, “If you want to realize the Buddha-nature, you must first get rid of selfish pride.”

The people say, “Is the Buddha-nature big or is it small?”

The Venerable One says, “The Buddha-nature is not big and not small, it is not wide and not narrow, it is without happiness and without rewards, it does not die and it is not born.”

When they hear these excellent principles, they all turn from their original mind. Then the Venerable One, from his seat, manifests his free body, which seems like the perfect circle of a full moon. All those gathered only hear the sound of Dharma; they do not see the Master’s form. In that assembly is a rich man’s son, Kāṇadeva.⁶⁸ He says to the assembly, “Do you know what this form is or not?”

Those in the assembly say, “The present [form] is something our eyes have never before seen, our ears have never before heard, our minds have never before known, and our bodies have never before experienced.” Kāṇadeva says, “Here the Venerable One is manifesting the form of the Buddha-nature to show it to us. How do we know this? It may be presumed that the formless state of samādhi⁶⁹ in shape resembles the full moon. The meaning of the Buddha-nature is evident and it is transparently clear.”

After these words, the circle disappears at once, and [the Master] is sitting on his seat. Then he preaches the following verse:

[My] body manifests the roundness of the moon,
By this means demonstrating the physique of the buddhas.
The preaching of Dharma has no set form.
The Real Function is beyond sounds and sights.

[45] Remember, the true Real Function is beyond the momentary manifestation of sounds and sights, and the real preaching of Dharma has no set form. The Venerable One has preached the Buddha-nature for others far and wide, innumerable times, and now we have quoted just one such example. “If you want to realize⁷⁰ the Buddha-nature, you must first get rid of selfish pride.” We should intuit and affirm the point of this preaching without fail. It is not that there is no realization; realization is just getting rid of selfish pride. Selfishness is not of only one kind. Pride too has many varieties. Methods of getting rid also may be of myriad diversity, but they are all realization of the Buddha-nature, which we should learn as realization⁷⁰ through the eyeballs and seeing⁷¹ with the eyes. Do not associate the words “Buddha-nature is not big and not small...” with those of the common man or the two vehicles. To have thought, one-sidedly and stubbornly, that the Buddha-nature must be wide and great, is to have been harboring a wrong idea. We should consider, as we hear it now, the truth which is restricted just in the moment of the present by the expression “Beyond big and beyond small.” For we are able to utilize [this] hearing as consideration. Now let us listen to the poem preached by the Venerable One, in which he says, “My body manifests the roundness of the moon, By this means demonstrating the physique of the buddhas.” Because his manifestation of a body has already by concrete means demonstrated the physique of the buddhas, it is the roundness of the moon. So we should learn all length, shortness, squareness, and roundness as this manifestation of a body.⁷² Those who have become more and more unfamiliar with body and with its manifestation are not only ignorant of the roundness of the moon, but are also other than the physique of the buddhas. Stupid people think that what the Venerable One calls “the roundness of the moon” is the manifestation of a fantastically transformed body. This is the wrong idea of types who have not received the transmission of the Buddha’s truth. At what place and at what moment might there be another manifestation of a different body? Remember, at this time the Venerable One is simply seated upon his high seat. The manner in which his body manifests itself is just the same as in the case of any person seated here now. This body is just the roundness of the moon manifesting itself. The body manifesting itself is beyond square and round, beyond existence and non-existence, beyond invisibility and visibility, and beyond the eighty-four thousand skandhas: it is just the body manifesting itself. “The roundness of the moon” describes the moon of “This place is the place where something ineffable exists; explain it as fine or explain it as coarse!”⁷³ Because this body manifesting itself first must have got rid of selfish pride, it is not that of Nāgārjuna: it is the physique of the buddhas. And because it demonstrates by concrete means⁷⁴ it lays bare the physique of the buddhas. That being so, the periphery of “buddhas” is irrelevant. Though the Buddha-nature has transparent clarity which in shape resembles the full moon, there is no arranging of a round moon form.⁷⁵ Furthermore, the Real Function is beyond sounds and sights. The body manifesting itself also is beyond the visual body and beyond the world of aggregation. Its appearance is the same as that of the world of aggregates, but it is demonstration by concrete means; it is the physique of the buddhas. Such is the aggregation of Dharma-preaching, which has no set form. When that which has no set form further becomes the formless state of samādhi, it is a body manifesting itself. The reason that although the whole assembly is now watching the distant form of the round moon, the eyes have never before seen it, is that it is the totality of Dharma-preaching transforming the moment, and it is the manifestation of a free body being beyond sounds and sights. Momentary disappearance⁷⁶ and momentary appearance are the stepping forward and stepping back of a circle.⁷⁷ Then, from his seat, he manifests his free body, just at which moment, all those gathered only hear the sound of Dharma; they do not see the Master’s form. The Venerable One’s rightful successor, the Venerable Kāṇadeva, clearly knows this as the form of the full moon, he knows this as the roundness of the moon, he knows this as the body manifesting itself, he knows this as the nature of the buddhas, and he knows this as the physique of the buddhas. Though there are many who have entered [the Master’s] room and had their pots filled, there may be none to equal Kāṇadeva. Kāṇadeva is a venerable one [worthy] of a half-seat,⁷⁸ and is a guiding master to the order, a complete authority in an auxiliary seat.⁷⁹ His having received the authentic transmission of the right-Dharma-eye treasury, the supreme and great Dharma, is similar to the case of the Venerable Mahākāśyapa who was the chief seat on Vulture Peak. Nāgārjuna had many disciples before his conversion, when he belonged to the teachings of non-Buddhism, but he has bid them all farewell. Having become a Buddhist patriarch, Nāgārjuna authentically transmits the great Dharma-eye treasury to Kāṇadeva as the one rightful successor to be given the Dharma: this is the one-to-one transmission of the Buddha’s supreme truth. Nevertheless, wrong groups of usurpers often boast, “We also are the heirs to the Dharma of the great Nāgārjuna.” They make commentaries and put together interpretations, often having feigned the hand of Nāgārjuna himself. [These works] are not the works of Nāgārjuna. Groups discarded long ago [by Master Nāgārjuna] disturb and confuse human beings and gods. Disciples of the Buddha should solely recognize that [teachings] not transmitted by Kāṇadeva are not the truth of Nāgārjuna. This is right belief and the right conclusion. But many accept what they know to be fake. The stupidity of living beings who insult the great prajñā is pitiful and sad.

[52] The Venerable Kāṇadeva, the story goes, indicating the Venerable Nāgārjuna's body manifesting itself, tells the assembly, “Here the Venerable One is manifesting the form of the Buddha-nature to show it to us. How do we know this? It may be presumed that the formless state of samādhi in shape resembles the full moon. The meaning of the Buddha-nature is evident and it is transparently clear.” Among the skin-bags of the past and present who have seen and heard the Buddha-Dharma that has now spread through the heavens above, through the human world, and through the great thousand dharma-worlds, who has said that a body manifesting its form is the Buddha-nature? Through the great thousand dharma-worlds, only the Venerable Kāṇadeva has said so. The others only say that the Buddha-nature is not seen by the eyes, not heard by the ears, not known by the mind, and so on. They do not know that the body manifesting itself is the Buddha-nature, therefore they do not say so. The ancestral Master does not begrudge them [the teaching], but their eyes and ears are shut and so they cannot see or hear it. Never having established body-knowing, they cannot make out [the teaching]. As they watch from afar the formless state of samādhi whose shape resembles the full moon, and as they do prostrations to it, it is something their eyes have never before seen. “The meaning of the Buddha-nature is evident and it is transparently clear.” So the state in which the body manifesting itself preaches the Buddha-nature is transparently clear, and is evident. And the state in which the preaching of the Buddha-nature is a body manifesting itself is demonstration, by concrete means, of the physique of the buddhas. Where could there be one buddha or two buddhas who failed to realize as the buddha-physique this demonstration by concrete means?⁸⁰ The buddha-physique is a body manifesting itself. The Buddha-nature exists as a body manifesting itself. Even the thinking of a buddha or the thinking of a patriarch, which expresses and understands [the Buddha-nature] as the four elements and the five aggregates, is also moments of a body manifesting itself. [Master Nāgārjuna] has spoken of “the physique of the buddhas”: the world of aggregation is a state like this, and all virtues are this virtue. The Buddha-virtue is to master this state of a body manifesting itself, and to bag it conclusively.⁸¹ The going and coming of all the countless and boundless virtues are individual moments of this body manifesting itself. But since the time of Nāgārjuna and Kāṇadeva, Master and disciple, the many people who have done Buddhist practice through all directions of the three countries⁸² in former ages and in later ages have never said anything to equal Nāgārjuna and Kāṇadeva. How many sutra-teachers, commentary-teachers, and the like have blundered past the truth of the Buddhist patriarchs? Since long ago in the great Kingdom of Sung, whenever [people] have tried to depict this story, it has been impossible for them to depict it with body, to depict it with mind, to depict it in space, or to depict it on a wall. Vainly painting it with brushes, they have drawn above the Dharma-seat a circle like a round mirror, and have seen this as the present body of Nāgārjuna manifesting the roundness of the moon. While the frosts and flowers of several hundred years have appeared and fallen, [their pictures] have been trying to form splinters of metal in people’s eyes, but no-one has called them mistaken. It is pitiful. Myriad matters have been bungled like this. If anyone understands that the body manifesting the roundness of the moon is a circle, that is a genuine case of a painted rice cake.⁸³ If we made fun of such a person, we might die of laughter. It is regrettable that among lay people and monks throughout the great Kingdom of Sung, not even one has heard and understood the words of Nāgārjuna or penetrated and realized the words of Kāṇadeva. How much less could they be directly familiar with the state of the body manifesting itself. They are blind to the round moon, and they have lacked the state of the full moon. This is due to negligence in emulating the ancients, and deficiency in venerating the ancients. Past buddhas and recent buddhas must just experience the real state of the body manifesting itself, and never savor a pictured rice cake. Remember, in the depiction of the image of the body manifesting the roundness of the moon, there must be the body manifesting its form upon the Dharma-seat. [Depiction of] raising of the eyebrows and winking of an eye should be straight and direct. The skin, flesh, bones, and marrow which are the right-Dharma-eye treasury must inevitably be sitting in the mountain-still state. The face breaking into a smile should be conveyed, because it makes buddhas and makes patriarchs.⁸⁴ If these pictures are different from the form of the moon, then they lack the shape of reality,⁸⁵ they do not preach Dharma, they are without sounds and sights, and they have no Real Function. If we seek the state of a body manifesting itself we should picture the roundness of the moon, and when we picture the roundness of the moon we should indeed picture the roundness of the moon because a body manifesting itself is the roundness of the moon. When we picture the roundness of the moon we should picture the form of the full moon, and we should manifest the form of the full moon.⁸⁶ However, [people] do not depict a body manifesting itself, do not depict the round moon, do not depict the form of the full moon, do not picture the physique of the buddhas, do not physically realize demonstration by concrete means, and do not picture the preaching of Dharma. They vainly picture a painted rice cake. What function does [such a picture] have? Putting on the eyes at once and looking at it, who could directly arrive at the present and be satisfied and without hunger? The moon is a round shape, and round is the state of the body manifesting itself. In learning roundness, do not learn it as [the roundness of] a coin, and do not liken it to [the roundness] of a rice cake. The body manifesting itself is the roundness of the moon, and the shape of reality is the full moon’s shape. We should study a coin and a rice cake as round.⁸⁷

[58] Traveling as a cloud in former days, I went to the great Kingdom of Sung. It is around the autumn of the 16th year of Kajo⁸⁸ when I arrive at Kori Zen Temple on A-iku-o-zan mountain.⁸⁹ On the wall of the west corridor I see paintings of the transformed figures of the thirty-three patriarchs of India and China. At this time I have no clear view [about them]. Later, during the summer retreat in the first year of Hogyo,⁹⁰ I go there again, and while walking down the corridor with Guest-Supervisor⁹¹ Jokei from west Shoku,⁹² I ask the guest-supervisor, “Just what kind of transformation is this?” The guest-supervisor says, “It is Nāgārjuna's body manifesting the form of the round moon.” In saying this he has no nostrils in his complexion and no words in his voice. I say, “This really seems to be a picture of a rice cake!” At this the guest-supervisor laughs loudly, but there is no sword in his laughter to break the painted cake. Thereafter the guest-supervisor and I discuss [the picture] several times, while visiting the Śarīra Hall⁹³ and the six beautiful places in the temple, but he is not even capable of doubt. Most other monks who happen to comment on it also completely miss the point. I say, “I shall try to ask the abbot.” At the time the abbot is Master Daiko.⁹⁴ The guest-supervisor says, “He has no nostrils. He will not be able to answer. How could he know?” So I refrain from asking the veteran Ko. Although brother Kei speaks like this, he too is unable to understand. Other skin-bags who hear our talk also have nothing to say. Former and recent heads of the dining table are not perplexed to see [the picture] and they do not correct it. They probably could not even paint it themselves. The Dharma, in general, cannot be depicted. If we are going to depict it, we should depict it directly. Yet no-one has ever painted the roundness of the moon as a body manifesting itself. In sum, because [people] do not wake up from views and opinions that the Buddha-nature is related with the thinking, sensing, mindfulness, and realization [described] now, they seem—in regard to the words “having the Buddha-nature” and in regard to the words “being without the Buddha-nature”—to have lost the boundary of clear understanding. Few even learn that they should speak the words. Remember, this state of neglect comes from their having stopped making effort. Among heads of the table in many districts there are some who die without once in their life voicing the expression of the truth “the Buddha-nature.” Some say that those who listen to teachings discuss the Buddha-nature, but patch-robed monks who practice Zen should not speak of it. People like this really are animals. Who are the band of demons that seeks to infiltrate and to defile the truth of our Buddha-Tathāgata? Is there any such thing as “listening to teachings” in the Buddha’s truth? Is there any such thing as “practicing Zen” in the Buddha’s truth? Remember that in the Buddha’s truth there has never been any such thing as “listening to teachings” or “practicing Zen.”

[62] National Master Sai-an⁹⁵ from the Enkan district of Koshu⁹⁶ is a venerable patriarch in Baso’s lineage. One day he preaches to the assembly, “All living beings have the Buddha-nature!”⁹⁷

These words “all living beings” should be investigated at once. The actions, ways, circumstances, and personalities of all living beings are not only one, and their views are miscellaneous. “Common men,” “non-Buddhists,” “the three vehicles,” “the five vehicles,” and so on, may be concrete individuals. The meaning of “all living beings,” as described now in Buddhism, is that all those that have mind are living beings, for minds are just living beings. Those without mind may also be living beings, for living beings are just mind.⁹⁸ So minds all are living beings, and living beings all have the Buddha-nature.⁹⁹ Grass, trees, and national lands are mind itself; because they are mind, they are living beings, and because they are living beings they have the Buddha-nature. The sun, the moon, and the stars are mind itself; because they are mind, they are living beings, and because they are living beings they have the Buddha-nature. The having Buddha-nature of which the National Master speaks is like this. If it is not like this, it is not the having Buddha-nature of which we speak in Buddhism. The point expressed now by the National Master is only that all living beings have the Buddha-nature. Those who are utterly different from living beings¹⁰⁰ might be beyond having the Buddha-nature. So now let us ask the National Master: “Do all buddhas have the Buddha-nature, or not?” We should question him and test him like this. We should research that he does not say “All living beings are the Buddha-nature itself,” but says “All living beings have the Buddha-nature.” He needs to get rid of the have in have the Buddha-nature. Getting rid is the single track of iron, and the single track of iron is the way of the birds.¹⁰¹ Then the nature of all buddhas possesses living beings. This principle not only elucidates living beings, but also elucidates the Buddha-nature. The National Master is not struck by realization of [this] understanding while he is expressing the truth, but that is not to deny that he will be struck by the realization in time. Neither is his expression of the truth today without meaning. Moreover, we do not always understand ourselves the truths with which we are equipped, but the four elements and the five aggregates are present nonetheless, and skin, flesh, bones, and marrow are present nonetheless. This being so, there are cases in which expressions are expressed by a whole life, and there are individual moments of life which are dependent upon their expression.

[66] Zen Master Dai-en¹⁰² of Dai-i-san mountain one day preaches to the assembly, “All living beings are without the Buddha-nature.”¹⁰³

Among the human beings and gods who hear this, there are those of great makings who rejoice, and there is no absence of people who are astonished and doubtful. The words preached by Śākyamuni are, “All living beings totally have the Buddha-nature.” The words preached by Dai-i are, “All living beings are without the Buddha-nature.” There may be a great difference between the meaning of “have” and “are without” as words, and some might doubt which expression of the truth is accurate and which not. But only “All living beings are without the Buddha-nature” is the senior in Buddhism. Although Enkan’s words about having the Buddha-nature seem to stretch out a hand together with the eternal Buddha, the situation may be a staff being carried on the shoulders of two people. Now Dai-i is not like that: the situation may be the staff swallowing the two people. Moreover, the National Master is Baso’s disciple, and Dai-i is Baso’s grandson-disciple. Yet the Dharma-grandson is a veteran of the truth of his grandfather-master, and the Dharma-son is a youngster in the truth of his father-master. The conclusion which Dai-i expresses now is that he has seen “All living beings are without the Buddha-nature” as the conclusion. He is never describing a nebulous state which is wide of the mark: he possesses the state in which he is receiving and retaining like this a concrete sutra within his own house. We should grope on further: How could all living beings be the Buddha-nature? How could they have the Buddha-nature? If any have the Buddha-nature they might be a band of demons. Bringing a demon’s sheet, they would like to lay it over all living beings. Because the Buddha-nature is just the Buddha-nature, living beings are just living beings. Living beings are not originally endowed with the Buddha-nature. Even if they want to be endowed, the point is that the Buddha-nature cannot start coming to them. Do not say that Mr. Chang drinks sake and Mr. Lee gets drunk.¹⁰⁴ If [a being] were to have “the Buddha-nature” it would never be a living being.¹⁰⁵ And [a state] in which “living beings” are present is ultimately other than the Buddha-nature.¹⁰⁶ For this reason, Hyakujo¹⁰⁷ says, “To preach that living beings have the Buddha-nature is to insult Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha. And to preach that living beings are without the Buddha-nature is also to insult Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha.” So to say “have the Buddha-nature” and to say “are without the Buddha-nature” both become an insult. Even if they become an insult, we should not refrain from saying them. Now I would like to ask you, Dai-i and Hyakujo, “I do not deny that it is an insult, but have you been able to explain the Buddha-nature or not?” If they are able to explain, [the explanation] will restrict the explanation itself. If there is an act of explaining, it will experience the same state as the act of hearing. Further, I would like to say to Dai-i, “Although you have expressed the truth that ‘All living beings are without the Buddha-nature,’ you have not said that ‘All the Buddha-nature is without living beings,’ and you have not said that ‘All the Buddha-nature is without the Buddha-nature.’ Still more, you have never seen even in a dream that all buddhas are without the Buddha-nature. Let us see you try [again].”

[71] Zen Master Daichi¹⁰⁷ of Hyakujo-zan mountain preaches to the assembly, “Buddha is the supreme vehicle. It is the highest wisdom. The truth of this [state of] buddha establishes the person. This buddha has the Buddha-nature. It is a guiding teacher. It has command of the style of behavior which is free of hindrances. It is unhindered wisdom. Hence it is able to utilize cause-and-effect, and it is free in happiness and wisdom. It becomes the carriage that carries cause-and-effect. In life it is not subject to detention by life. In death it is not subject to detention by death.¹⁰⁸ In the five aggregates it is like a gate opening: unhindered by the five aggregates, it departs and stays freely, and leaves and enters without difficulty. If the state can be like this—regardless of relative rank, superiority or inferiority, for even the body of an ant can be like this—then this is totally the pure and fine land, and is the unthinkable.”¹⁰⁹

These then are the words of Hyakujo. The five aggregates are the immortal body of the present. The moment of the present is a gate opening. It is beyond being hindered by the five aggregates. When we utilize life, we are not detained by life. When we utilize death, we are not hindered by death. Do not be unduly in love with life, and do not be unreasonably afraid of death. They are just the place where the Buddha-nature exists, and those who are disturbed or offended [at this] are non-Buddhists. To affirm [the Buddha-nature] as the miscellaneous circumstances manifest before us is to command the style of behavior which is free of hindrances. Such is this buddha, which is the supreme vehicle. The place where this this buddha exists is the pure and fine land itself.

[73] Obaku¹¹⁰ is sitting in Nansen’s¹¹¹ tea room. Nansen asks Obaku, “If we equally practice balance and wisdom, we clearly realize the Buddha-nature: How about this theory?”

Obaku says, “Through the twelve hours,¹¹² without relying on a single thing, we have got it already.”

Nansen says, “That is not the patriarch’s¹¹³ own viewpoint, is it?” Obaku says, “I would not be so bold [as to say so].”

Nansen says, “For the present, I will waive the cost of your soy and water, but what person can I get to return to me the cost of your straw sandals?”¹¹⁴

Obaku then desists.¹¹⁵

The point of this equal practice of balance and wisdom is not that as long as the practice of balance does not hinder the practice of wisdom there is clear realization of the Buddha-nature in their equal practice.¹¹⁶ [The point is that] in the state of clearly realizing the Buddha-nature there is practice, which is the equal practice of balance and wisdom.¹¹⁷ [Nansen] says “How about this theory?” This may be the same as saying, for example, “Clearly realizing the Buddha-nature is the action of Who?”¹¹⁸ To say “The Buddha-nature’s practice of equality¹¹⁹ clearly realizes the Buddha-nature: How about this theory?” would also be an expression of the truth. Obaku says, “The twelve hours do not rely on a single thing.” The point here is that although the reality of the twelve hours¹²⁰ is located in the reality of the twelve hours, it is beyond reliance. Because the state of not relying on a single thing is the reality of the twelve hours, the Buddha-nature is clearly realized. As the arrival of what moment, and as the existence of what national land, should we see this reality of the twelve hours? Must the twelve hours mentioned now be the twelve hours of the human world? Do the twelve hours exist in far distant places? Have the twelve hours of a world of white silver just come to us temporarily? Whether they are of this land or whether they are of other worlds, they are beyond reliance. They are the reality of the twelve hours already, and [so] they may be beyond reliance. Saying “That is not the patriarch’s own viewpoint, is it?” is like saying “You do not say that this is [your] viewpoint, do you?”¹²¹ Though [Nansen] says “Is it the patriarch’s own viewpoint?” [Obaku] cannot turn his head [to Nansen] and say “It is mine,” because, while it is exactly befitting to himself, it is not Obaku’s, Obaku is not always only himself, and the patriarch’s viewpoint is the state of being disclosed in complete clarity.¹²² Obaku says, “I would not be so bold.” In the land of Sung when you are asked about an ability which you possess, you say these words “I would not be so bold” to suggest that the ability is [your own] ability. So the expression “I would not be so bold” is not a lack of confidence. We should not suppose that this expression means what it says. Though the patriarch’s viewpoint is the patriarch himself, though the patriarch’s viewpoint is Obaku himself, in expressing himself he should not be so bold. The state may be a water buffalo coming up and mooing. To speak in this state is speech. We should also try to express, in other speech that is speech, the principle that [Obaku] expresses. Nansen says, “For the present, I will waive the cost of your soy and water, but what person can I get to return to me the cost of your straw sandals?” In other words, “Let us set aside for a while the cost of your broth, but who can I get to return to me the cost of your straw sandals?”¹²³ We should exhaust life after life investigating the intention of these words. We should apply the mind and diligently research why he is not concerned for the present about the cost of soy and water.¹²⁴ Why is he concerned about the cost of straw sandals, [as if to say,] “In your years and months of wayfaring, how many straw sandals have you trod through?” Now [Obaku] might say, “I have never put on my sandals without repaying the cost!” Or he might say, “Two or three pairs.” These could be his expressions of the truth, and these could be his intentions. [But] Obaku then desists. This is desisting. It is neither to stop because of not being affirmed [oneself] nor to stop because of not affirming [the other]: a monk of true colors is not like that. Remember, there are words in desisting, as there are swords in laughter. [Obaku’s state] is the Buddha-nature clearly realizing satisfaction with morning gruel and satisfaction with midday rice.

[79] Quoting this story, Isan¹²⁵ asks Kyozan,¹²⁶ “Obaku is not able to hold his own against Nansen, is he?”

Kyozan says, “That is not so. We should know that Obaku has the resourcefulness to trap a tiger.”

Isan says, “The disciple’s viewpoint has become as excellent as this!”

Dai-i’s words mean, “Was Obaku, in former days, unable to stand up to Nansen?” Kyozan says that Obaku has the resourcefulness to trap a tiger. Being already able to trap a tiger, he might stroke the tiger’s head.¹²⁷ To trap a tiger and to stroke a tiger are to go among alien beings.¹²⁸ Is to clearly realize the Buddha-nature to open an eye? Or is the Buddha-nature’s clear realization the loss of an eye? Speak at once! Speak at once! The Buddha-nature’s viewpoint has become as excellent as this! For this reason, half things and complete things are beyond reliance, a hundred thousand things are beyond reliance, and a hundred thousand hours are beyond reliance. And for this reason, I say:

Traps are a unity,¹²⁹
Real time is the [concrete] twelve.¹³⁰
Reliance and the state beyond reliance,
Are like vines clinging onto a tree.¹³¹
The reality of the Universe and the whole Universe itself,
At last are prior to the occurrence of words.

[82] A monk asks Great Master Shinsai¹³² of Joshu, “Does even a dog have the Buddha-nature or not?”¹³³

We should clarify the meaning of this question. “A dog” is a dog.¹³⁴ The question does not ask whether the Buddha-nature can or cannot exist in the dog; it asks whether even an iron man learns the truth.¹³⁵ To happen upon such a poison hand¹³⁶ may be a matter for deep regret, and at the same time the scene recalls the meeting, after thirty years, with half a sacred person.¹³⁷

Joshu says, “It is without.”¹³⁸ When we hear this expression, there are concrete paths by which to learn it: the “being without” with which the Buddha-nature describes itself may be expressed like this; the “not having” which describes the dog itself may be expressed like this; and “there is nothing,” as exclaimed by an onlooker, may be expressed like this.¹³⁹ There may come a day when this “being without” becomes merely the grinding away of a stone.¹⁴⁰

The monk says, “All living beings totally have the Buddha-nature. Why is the dog without?” The intention here is as follows: “If all living beings did not exist, then the Buddha-nature would not exist and the dog would not exist. How about this point? Why should the dog’s Buddha-nature depend on ‘non-existence.’?” Joshu says, “Because it has karmic consciousness.”¹⁴¹ The intention of this expression is that even though the reason it exists is karmic consciousness and to have karmic consciousness is the reason it exists,¹⁴² the dog is without anything, and the Buddha-nature is without anything. Karmic consciousness never understands intellectually what the dog is, so how could the dog meet the Buddha-nature? Whether we cast away duality or take up both sides, the state is just the constant working of karmic consciousness.

[85] A monk asks Joshu, “Does the Buddha-nature exist even in a dog or not?”¹⁴³

This question may be the fact that this monk is able to stand up to Joshu. Thus, assertions and questions about the Buddha-nature are the everyday tea and meals of Buddhist patriarchs. Joshu says, “It exists.”¹⁴⁴ The situation of this “It exists” is beyond the “existence” of scholastic commentary teachers and the like, and beyond the dogmatic “existence” of the Existence School.¹⁴⁵ We should move ahead and learn the Buddha’s Existence. The Buddha’s Existence is Joshu’s “It exists.” Joshu’s “it exists” is “the dog exists,” and “the dog exists” is “the Buddha-nature exists.”

The monk says, “It exists already—then why does it forcibly enter this concrete bag of skin?” This monk’s expression of the truth poses the question of whether it is present existence, whether it is past existence, or whether it is Existence already;¹⁴⁶ and although Existence already resembles the other “existences,” Existence already clearly stands alone. Does Existence already need to force its way in? Or does Existence already not need to force its way in?¹⁴⁷ The action of forcibly entering this concrete bag of skin does not accommodate idle heedless consideration.

Joshu says, “Because it knowingly commits a deliberate violation!” As a secular saying these words have long since spread through the streets, but now they are Joshu’s expression of the truth. What they discuss is deliberate violation. Those who do not doubt this expression of the truth may be few. The present word “enter” is difficult to understand; at the same time, the word “enter” is itself unnecessary.¹⁴⁸ Moreover,

If we want to know the immortal person in the hut,
How could we depart from this concrete skin-bag here and now?¹⁴⁹

Even if the immortal person is anyone, at what moment is it [necessary to say] “Do not depart from your skin-bag!”? A deliberate violation is not always entry into a skin bag, and to have forcibly entered a concrete skin bag is not always to knowingly commit a deliberate violation. Because of knowing, there can be deliberate violation. Remember, this deliberate violation may contain the action of getting free of the body—this is expressed as “forcibly entering.” The action of getting free of the body, at just the moment of containment, contains self and contains other people. At the same time, never complain that it is impossible to avoid being a person before a donkey and behind a horse.¹⁵⁰ Still more, the founding Patriarch Ungo¹⁵¹ says, “Even to have learned matters on the periphery of the Buddha-Dharma is to have adopted a mistaken approach already.”¹⁵² That being so, although we have been making the mistake for a long time—which has deepened into days and deepened into months—of half-learning matters on the periphery of the Buddha-Dharma, this may be the state of the dog that has forcibly entered a concrete skin bag. Though it knowingly commits a deliberate violation, it has the Buddha-nature.

[89] In the order of Master Chosa Keishin,¹⁵³ government official Jiku¹⁵⁴ asks, “An earthworm has been cut into two, and the two parts are both moving. I wonder in which part is the Buddha-nature.”

The Master says, “Do not be deluded.”

The official says, “What should we make of their moving?”

The Master says, “It is only that wind and fire have not dissipated.”¹⁵⁵

Now when the official says “An earthworm has been cut into two” has he concluded that before it was cut it was one? In the everyday life of Buddhist patriarchs the state is not like that. An earthworm is not originally one, and when an earthworm has been cut it is not two. We must strive to learn in practice the meaning of the words one and two. He says, “The two parts together¹⁵⁶ are moving.” Has he understood that two parts are a unity before being cut, or has he understood that the ascendant state of Buddha is a unity? Regardless of whether or not the official understands the words “two parts,” we should not discard the words. Is it that two parts which have been separated are made into a unity and thereafter a unity exists? In describing the movement, he says “both moving.” [Though] “Balance moves it and wisdom removes it,”¹⁵⁷ it may be that both are movement. “I wonder in which part is the Buddha-nature.” This might be expressed, “The Buddha-nature has been cut into two. I wonder in which part is the earthworm.” We should clarify this expression of the truth in detail. Does saying “The two parts are both moving. In which part is there the Buddha-nature?” mean that if both are moving they are unfit as a location for the Buddha-nature? Does it mean that if both are moving, although movement takes place in both, the location of the Buddha-nature must be one or the other of them? The Master says, “Do not be deluded.” What might be his point here? He says, “Do not be deluded.” That being so, does he mean that when the two parts are both moving they are without delusion, or beyond delusion? Or does he simply mean that the Buddha-nature is without delusion? We should also investigate whether he is just saying “There are no delusions!” without touching upon discussion of the Buddha-nature and without touching upon discussion of the two parts. Do the words “What should we make of their moving?” say that, because they are moving, an extra layer of Buddha-nature should be laid upon them? Or do the words assert that because they are moving they are beyond the Buddha-nature? Saying “Wind and fire have not dissipated” may cause the Buddha-nature to manifest itself. Should we see it as the Buddha-nature? Should we see it as wind and fire? We should not say that the Buddha-nature and wind-and-fire both appear together, and we should not say that when one appears the other does not appear. We should not say that wind and fire are just the Buddha-nature. Therefore Chosa does not say “An earthworm has the Buddha-nature” and he does not say “An earthworm is without the Buddha-nature.” He only says, “Do not be deluded” and says, “Wind and fire have not dissipated.” To fathom the vigorous state of the Buddha-nature, we should use Chosa’s words as the standard. We should quietly consider the words “Wind and fire have not dissipated.” What kind of truth is present in the words “not dissipated”? Does he say “not dissipated” to express that wind and fire have accumulated but there has not yet come a time for them to disperse? That could not be so.¹⁵⁸ “Wind and fire have not dissipated” is a Buddha preaching Dharma, and undissipated wind and fire are the Dharma preaching Buddha. For example, one sound preaching Dharma is the moment having arrived, and Dharma-preaching as one sound is the arrived moment—for Dharma is one sound, and one sound is Dharma. Furthermore, to think that the Buddha-nature exists only in the time of life, and that it will vanish at the time of death, is extremely naive and shallow. The time of living is the Buddha-nature as Existence and is the Buddha-nature as being without. The time of dying is the Buddha-nature as Existence and is the Buddha-nature as being without. If we are able to discuss the dissipation and non-dissipation of wind and fire, that may be [discussion of] the dissipation and non-dissipation of the Buddha-nature. The time of dissipation may be Existence as the Buddha-nature and may be being without as the Buddha-nature. The time of non-dissipation may be Existence as the Buddha-nature, and may be being without as the Buddha-nature. Those who have wrongly attached to the contrary view, that the Buddha-nature may or may not exist depending upon movement and non-movement, may or may not be divine depending upon consciousness and non-consciousness, and may or may not be the natural function depending on knowing and not knowing, are non-Buddhists. Since the kalpa without a beginning, many stupid people have seen consciousness of the divine as the Buddha-nature, and as the original human state. A person could die laughing! To express the Buddha-nature further, although it need not be getting covered in mud and staying in the water, it is fences, walls, tiles, and pebbles. When we express it in the further ascendant state, just what is the Buddha-nature? Have you fully understood? Three heads and eight arms!

Shobogenzo Bussho

Preached to the assembly at Kannon-dori-kosho-horin-ji temple in Kyoto prefecture on the 14th day of the 10th lunar month in the 2nd year of Ninji.¹⁵⁹

Notes

1. “Totally have” is 悉有 (SHITSU-U). 悉 (SHITSU, kotogoto[ku]) means “totally.” 有 (U, a[ru]) as a verb, means “have” or “possess” and also “exist”; and as a noun it means “being” or “existence.” In his commentary Master Dogen interprets 悉有 (SHITSU-U) in his own way, as an adjective and noun suggesting reality itself: “Total Existence.” ↩︎ ↩︎

2. Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, chap. 27. ↩︎

3. 1241. See also following note.
   ↩︎

4. The two phrases in parenthesis are in small characters in the source text. 先師 (SENSHI), “late Master” is Master Dogen’s usual way of referring to Master Tendo Nyojo, so it may be that the phrases were added by Master Dogen himself. ↩︎

5. 西天 (SAITEN), “Western Heavens,” means India. ↩︎

6. 東地 (TOCHI), “Eastern Lands,” means China. ↩︎

7. Master Daikan Eno’s words to Master Nangaku Ejo. See, for example, chap. 62, Hensan. ↩︎

8. Master Dogen emphasized the inclusiveness of the state. See chap. 46, Katto. ↩︎

9. Quoted from Master Yoka Genkaku’s poem Shodoka (Song of Experiencing the Truth). In the original poem the object that no-one has ever recognized is the valuable pearl (mani-ju) i.e. Zazen. 直截根源 (KONGEN o jiki[ni] ki[ru]), “direct cutting of the root” comes from the following lines: “Direct cutting of the root is what the Buddha affirmed; It is impossible for me to pick up leaves and look for branches.” ↩︎

10. Master Sekiso Keisho’s words, quoted in Keitoku-dento-roku, chap. 15. ↩︎

11. Master Nansen Fugan’s words, quoted in Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 1, no. 19, and Sho-bogenzo, Book 4, Appendix 1, Butsu-kojo-no-ji. ↩︎

12. A Brahmanist who questions the Buddha from an idealistic standpoint in the Garland Sutra. He also appears in chap. 39 of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. See, for example, Shobogenzo, chap. 1, Bendowa. ↩︎

13. Here the movement of wind and fire symbolizes the material basis of mind, which idealists fail to recognize. ↩︎

14. Having dealt with the idealistic misinterpretation of the Buddha-nature, Master Dogen now turns to deal with the materialistic misinterpretation. ↩︎

15. “Space” is also a translation of (KU). ↩︎

16. They are not abstractions. ↩︎

17. 赤心 (SEKISHIN), lit. “red mind,” expresses the state of sincerity, i.e., the mind as it is. ↩︎

18. The causes of the Buddha-nature exist as real facts in this world. ↩︎

19. “Should just reflect” is 当観 (TOKAN). In the quotation, 当 (TO, masa[ni]) means “should” or “must.” The same character sometimes means “just,” i.e. “just at the moment of the present” or “here and now.” Master Dogen picked up this second meaning in his commentary. 観 (KAN), “reflect,” represents the Sanskrit vipaśyanā. ↩︎ ↩︎

20. Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra chap. 28. ↩︎

21. The area which is colorful but not valuable. ↩︎

22. Master Dogen changed 欲知 (YOKU-CHI), “wanting to know,” into 当知 (TO-CHI), “really knowing just here and now”—see note 19. ↩︎

23. Master Kapimala. See chap. 15, Busso. ↩︎

24. With this quotation, Master Dogen’s explanation of the Buddha-nature moves from his theoretical outline of what the Buddha-nature is to preaching of the Buddha-nature as the concrete world. ↩︎

25. “All relying” in the second line of the poem is 皆依 (KAI-E). Master Dogen explained the characters from the subjective side as 全依 (ZEN-E), “total reliance,” or complete faith, and from the objective side as 依全 (E-ZEN), “reliance on the total,” or belief in the Universe. ↩︎

26. Pali sutras, which are very old, and consequently reflect the fondness of ancient Indians for mystical expressions. ↩︎

27. 前三三、後三三 (ZEN SANSAN, GO SANSAN), “three and three before, three and three behind,” suggests random concrete facts as opposed to general abstractions. See, for example, Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 2, no. 27: Monju asks Mujaku: “Where have you come from?” Mujaku says: “The south.” Monju says: “How is the Buddha-Dharma of the south dwelt in and maintained?” Mujaku says: “Few bhikṣus in the age of the latter Dharma observe the precepts.” Monju says: “How big are the saṅgha?” Mujaku says: “In some cases three hundred, in some cases five hundred.” Mujaku asks Monju: “How is the Buddha-Dharma here dwelt in and maintained?” Monju says: “The common and the sacred live together, and dragons and snakes mix in confusion.” Mujaku says: “How big are the saṅgha?” Monju says: “Three and three before, three and three behind.” ↩︎

28. The Sanskrit pāramitās means gone to the opposite shore, crossed over, traversed, perfected. The six pāramitās, or “perfections,” are listed in chap. 2, Maka-hannya-haramitsu. The six mystical powers are listed in chap. 25, Jinzu. ↩︎

29. See Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 1, no. 88. The expression is quoted here as an example of a cliché, or a generality. ↩︎

30. Master Daiman Konin (688–761). ↩︎

31. In modern-day Hupeh province in east central China. ↩︎

32. Master Dai-i Doshin (580–651). There is some doubt about the historical dates of the two masters. It may be that the story of Master Daiman Konin’s rebirth was invented to account for the historical discrepancy in the dates. ↩︎

33. The fourth patriarch’s question is 汝何姓 (nanji [wa] nan [no] SEI [zo]). 汝 (nanji) means “you,” 何 (nani) means “what,” and 姓 (SEI) means “family name.” Master Dogen interpreted the characters not only as the question “What is your name?” but also as the statement “Your name is What!” that is, “You are someone who cannot be labeled with a name.” ↩︎

34. In Keitoku-dento-roku, chap. 27, for example, someone asks Master Soga of Shishu, “What [is your] name?” The Master replies, “My name is What.” [The questioner] asks the Master further, “[You] are a person of what country?” The Master says, “I am a person of What country.” ↩︎

35. Master Daikan Eno’s words to Master Nangaku Ejo. See Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 2, no. 1, and Shobogenzo, chap. 7, Senjo, chap. 62, Hensan, etc. The origin of the words can also be traced back to Buddhism in India. In the Majjhima-nikāya (translated by the Pali Text Society as “Middle Length Sayings”) the Buddha quotes the words of his former teacher Ālāra, “This doctrine which I have realized, you too have realized. As I am, so you are; as you are, so am I...” ↩︎

36. The fifth patriarch’s answer, “I have a name,” is 姓即有 (SEI [wa] sunawa[chi] a[ri]). In the quotation 姓 (SEI) means “family name,” 即 (sunawa[chi]) is emphatic, and 有 (a[ri]) means “I have,” so the quotation is lit. “A family name indeed I have.” Here Master Dogen has reversed the order of the characters to 有即姓 (U-SOKU-SEI), so that 有 (U) means “Existence” and 即 (SOKU) means “is just”—”Existence is just the family name.” ↩︎

37. 即有 (SOKU-U). Here 即 (SOKU), “here and now,” is used as an adjective, and 有 (U), “Existence,” is a noun. ↩︎

38. The fourth patriarch’s question is 是何姓 (ko[re] nan [no] SEI [zo]). In the story 是 (ko[re]) means “it,” but in Master Dogen’s commentary, the same character 是 (ZE) means “the concrete,” “this concrete situation here and now,” or “This [reality].” In the story, 何 (nani) means “what,” but in the commentary the same character 何 (GA) means “that which cannot be described with words,” or “the ineffable state of What.” ↩︎

39. “This” is 是 (ZE) and “not right” is 不是 (FU-ZE). The effect of the play on words is to emphasize that this concrete reality here and now, in any circumstance, is always just the Buddha-nature. ↩︎

40. Though reality is different from intellectual concepts, Master Dogen also affirmed the real function of concepts, or names. See, for example, chap. 40, Gabyo. ↩︎

41. The fourth patriarch’s words “You are without the Buddha-nature” are 汝無仏性 (NANJI-MU-BUSSHO). 無 (MU) means “do not have” or “be without.” The fourth patriarch seemed simply to deny that the fifth patriarch had the Buddha-nature. But the fourth patriarch’s real intention was to use 無 (MU) and 仏性 (BUSSHO) like two nouns in apposition: “You are the real state which is without anything superfluous or lacking, and you are the Buddha-nature.” ↩︎

42. 仏頭 (BUTTO), lit. “the tip of buddha.” ↩︎

43. Obai, Joshu, and Dai-i indicate the orders of Master Daiman Konin, Master Joshu Jushin, and Master Isan Reiyu, respectively. ↩︎

44. “Emptiness” is 空 (KU), which means the sky, space, air, or emptiness. At the same time, it represents the Sanskrit śūnyatā. The first definition of śūnyatā given in the Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary is “emptiness.” Other, seemingly more philosophical, definitions reflect idealistic thought: “nothingness, non-existence, non-reality, illusory nature (of all worldly phenomena).” But the real philosophical meaning of śūnyatā is emptiness; the bare, bald, naked, raw, or transparent state, that is, the state in which reality is seen as it is. See chap. 2, Maka-hannya-haramitsu, and chap. 43, Kuge. ↩︎

45. “Being without” is 無 (MU). The original Chinese pictograph depicts a piece of paper above some flames: 無 (MU) suggests the denial that something is possessed or the denial that something exists. ↩︎

46. In this sentence Master Dogen denies the interpretation that 空 (KU), or śūnyatā, is “nothingness, non-existence, or non-reality.” He says 空は無にあらず (KU wa MU ni ara zu), “空 is not 無,” “śūnyatā is not non-existence.” In Master Dogen’s teaching śūnyatā is not the denial of real existence—it expresses the absence of anything other than real existence. ↩︎

47. In this sentence “emptiness” and “void” are both translations of 空 (KU), and “being without” and “does not exist” are both translations of 無 (MU). ↩︎

48. 色即是空 (SHIKI SOKU ZE KU), quoted from the Heart Sutra. In this sentence of the Heart Sutra, the meaning of “emptiness” is more philosophical: it suggests “the immaterial” face of reality as opposed to matter. The sutra says that the immaterial and the material are two faces of the same reality. See chap. 2, Maka-hannya-haramitsu. ↩︎

49. A monk asks Master Sekiso Keisho, “What was the ancestral Master’s intention in coming from the west?” The Master says, “One stone in space…” See Keitoku-dento-roku, chap. 15. “Space” is also a translation of 空 (KU). ↩︎

50. Master Daikan Eno. ↩︎

51. Master Daiman Konin. ↩︎

52. The Five Peaks. In Japanese pronunciation they are Taiyu, Shian, Ringa, Keiyo, and another Keiyo. ↩︎

53. At that time, in the Tang dynasty, the center of government and civilization was in the north of China, and people from the south were sometimes looked down upon as primitive. At the same time, in his youth Master Daikan Eno lived in poverty, supporting his aged mother as a woodcutter. So the fifth patriarch’s words invite the understanding that Master Daikan Eno was too primitive to have the Buddha-nature, although that was not his true intention. ↩︎

54. The original word in the story 人 (NIN, hito), “person,” “people,” can be either singular or plural, male or female. So the fifth patriarch’s words include both the general principle and words directed at Master Daikan Eno himself. ↩︎

55. Suggests that the act of becoming buddha, for example practicing Zazen, means getting free of what does not originally belong to us. ↩︎

56. This quotation is a continuation of the previous story. Rokuso-dankyo (The Sixth Patriarch’s Platform Sutra), chap. 1, has a different version of the story. It is not clear from where Master Dogen quoted the story, but from the account in Rokuso-dankyo we can assume that the conversation took place on the same occasion. ↩︎

57. 礙の力量 (KEIGE no RIKIRYO), “power of restriction,” means the ability to realize things as they are. Master Dogen uses the formula “reality restricted by reality” to suggest reality as it is. ↩︎

58. Master Dogen affirmed the means, not only the end. ↩︎

59. A disciple of Master Daikan Eno. This monk’s name was Koze Shitetsu. Gyosho was his personal name in secular life. ↩︎

60. Keitoku-dento-roku, chap. 5. ↩︎

61. 無常 (MUJO), which represents the Sanskrit anitya. 無常 (MUJO) is usually understood as an attribute such as impermanence, transience, inconstancy, et cetera, but the sixth patriarch’s intention is to describe reality itself at the moment of the present. ↩︎

62. Alludes to the Lotus Sutra, Kanzeon-bosatsu-fu-mon-bon (The Universal Gate of the Bodhisattva Regarder of the Sounds of the World). See LS 3.252, and Shobogenzo, chap. 17, Hokke-ten-hokke, and chap. 33, Kannon. ↩︎

63. “Everyday” is 常 (JO), lit. “constant,” “everyday,” or “usual.” ↩︎

64. Throughout Shobogenzo, in general, 性 (SHO) does not mean “nature” or “essence” in an abstract sense, but rather “the natural state” or “the natural function.” See also chap. 48, Sesshin-sessho, chap. 54, Hossho, et cetera. ↩︎

65. Master Dogen interpreted both 無常 (MUJO), “absence of constancy,” and 常 (JO), “the constant,” as descriptions of the state just in the moment of the present. Because reality at the present moment is cut off from the past and the future, it cannot be said to remain constant and cannot be said to change. ↩︎

66. Master Nāgārjuna lived between approx. 150 and 250 A.D. See chap. 15, Busso. ↩︎

67. The three Chinese names for Master Nāgārjuna are 竜樹 (RYUJU), “Dragon-Tree,” 竜勝 (RYUSHO), “Dragon-Excellence,” and 竜猛 (RYUMO) “Dragon-Might.” The Sanskrit nāga means “dragon.” ↩︎

68. Master Kāṇadeva, the fifteenth patriarch. See chap. 15, Busso. ↩︎

69. 無相三昧 (MUSO ZANMAI). 無 (MU) means “without,” 相 (SO) means form, and 三昧 (ZANMAI) represents phonetically the Sanskrit samādhi, which means “concentration,” or “the balanced state.” 無相三昧 (MUSO ZANMAI) does not mean that the state has no form, i.e., that the Master was invisible. It means that the Master’s state was not restricted to any specific fixed form. ↩︎

70. 見 (KEN), lit. to see, or to meet. ↩︎ ↩︎

71. This “seeing” represents another character, 覩 (TO), which can be used interchangeably with 見 (KEN). But the question “Who can see it?” in the story includes this character, whereas Master Nāgārjuna's words include the character 見 (KEN). So a distinction may be drawn between 見 (KEN) which includes the whole attitude of the viewer, and 覩 (TO) which just means seeing. ↩︎

72. In the poem the Master simply used the character 身 (SHIN), “body or person,” to refer to himself. So 身 (SHIN) suggests the Master’s whole body-and-mind. This sentence suggests that reality has concrete attributes and at the same time it is a whole entity. “The physique of the buddhas” is 諸仏体 (SHOBUTTAI). The character 体 (TAI) also means “body” but it is sometimes more concrete, substantial, or real: for example, it is used in the compounds 体力 (TAIRYOKU), “physical strength,” 体格 (TAIKAKU), “physique,” or “physical constitution,” and 体験 (TAIKEN), “real experience.” ↩︎

73. In response to a question from Master Rinzai, Fuke overturns a dinner table. Master Rinzai says, “Very coarse person!” Fuke says, “This place is the place where something ineffable exists. Explain it as coarse or explain it as fine.” (Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 1, no. 96). ↩︎

74. “It demonstrates by concrete means” is 以表 (I-HYO), translated in the poem as “by this means to demonstrate.” 以 (I) means “with,” “by means of,” or “by relying on something.” Master Dogen emphasized that real demonstration relies on some concrete means. ↩︎

75. 円月相 (EN-GETSU-SO), translated in the poem as “roundness of the moon,” is lit. “round moon form,” but this sentence indicates that the words of the poem describe a state, not a geometric form. ↩︎

76. 即隠 (SOKU-IN), translated in the story as “disappears at once.” ↩︎

77. They are the usual state of a circle, not something strange. ↩︎

78. 半座 (HANZA), lit. “half-seat,” refers to the Buddha sharing his seat with Master Mahākāśyapa. ↩︎

79. 全座の分座 (ZEN-ZA no BUN-ZA), lit. “complete-seat part-seat,” that is, a master in an auxiliary position but with ability to lead the whole order. ↩︎

80. この以表を仏体せざらん (kono I-HYO o BUTTAI se zara n), lit. “not to buddha-physique this demonstration by [concrete] means.” 仏体す (BUTTAI su) is used as a verb, “to buddha-body,” with 以表 (I-HYO), “demonstration by means,” as its direct object—the usage is also unconventional in Japanese. ↩︎

81. 嚢括 (NOKATSU). 嚢 (NO) means a sack, and 括 (KATSU) means to fasten. ↩︎

82. India, China, and Japan. ↩︎

83. In general, 画餅 (GABYO), or “a picture of a rice cake,” symbolizes something which cannot stop real hunger. In chap. 40, Gabyo, Master Dogen considers the problem in more detail. ↩︎

84. Alludes to the transmission between the Buddha and Master Mahākāśyapa. See, for example, chap. 68, Udonge. ↩︎

85. “The shape of reality” is 形如 (GYO-NYO), translated in the story as “in shape resembling…” 形 (GYO) means “shape” or “form.” 如 (NYO) means “like,” “as,” “as it is,” and sometimes “reality as it is.” ↩︎

86. In Zazen. ↩︎

87. We should study them as real (not only as circular). ↩︎

88. ↩︎

89. Mt. Ikuo in the modern-day province of Chekiang was one of the five mountains designated by the Sung government as centers of Buddhism. In 282 a man called (in Japanese) Ryu Sakka had found a tower on this mountain, and believed the tower to be one of those established by King Aśoka. The mountain was named A-iku-o-zan, meaning King Aśoka's mountain. ↩︎

90. ↩︎

91. 知客 (SHIKA), one of the assistant officers in a big temple. ↩︎

92. A district in modern-day Szechwan province in southwestern China. ↩︎

93. A hall for Buddhist relics. ↩︎

94. Dates and personal history not known. ↩︎

95. Master Enkan Sai-an (?–842), a successor of Master Baso Do-itsu. He is said to have died at an old age while practicing Zazen. ↩︎

96. In modern-day Chekiang province in eastern China. ↩︎

97. Rento-eyo, chap. 7, and Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 2, no. 15. ↩︎

98. For example, a bamboo chair can be thought of as a living being, because all beings, animate and inanimate, and mind are one. See chap. 47, Sangai-yuishin. ↩︎

99. 有仏性 (U-BUSSHO), “have the Buddha-nature,” or “are the Buddha-nature as Existence.” ↩︎

100. That is, buddhas. ↩︎

101. In other words, getting rid is what makes the world one, and to make the world one is the transcendent way. “Getting rid” is 脱落 (DATSURAKU); these characters appear in Master Tendo Nyojo’s often-quoted words that Zazen is getting rid of body and mind. ↩︎

102. Master Isan Reiyu (771–853), successor of Master Hyakujo Ekai. Master Hyakujo, like Master Enkan, was a successor of Master Baso Do-itsu. Master Isan became a monk at the age of fifteen, and studied under Master Hyakujo from the age of twenty-three. His disciples included Masters Kyozan Ejaku, Kyogen Chikan, and Rei-un Shigon. Dai-en was the posthumous title given to him by the Tang dynasty emperor Sen-so. ↩︎

103. Rento-eyo, chap. 7, and Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 2, no. 15. ↩︎

104. The dimension of thinking and the dimension of reality are absolutely different; we should not confuse the two. ↩︎

105. Because it would belong to the area of thinking. ↩︎

106. Because it is not a real state. ↩︎

107. Master Hyakujo Ekai (749–814), successor of Master Baso. His disciples include Master Isan Reiyu and Master Obaku Ki-un. Zen Master Daichi is his posthumous title. ↩︎ ↩︎

108. It is not worried by life and death. ↩︎

109. Kosonshuku-goroku (Record of the Words of the Venerable Patriarchs of the Past), chap. 1. ↩︎

110. Master Obaku Ki-un (died c. 855), successor of Master Hyakujo. ↩︎

111. Master Nansen Fugan (748–834), successor of Master Baso. His disciples include Master Joshu Jushin and Master Chosa Keishin. ↩︎

112. The whole day; 24 hours. ↩︎

113. “The patriarch” means “you.” Master Nansen thought Master Obaku’s words were so excellent that he wondered if they were Master Obaku’s own idea. ↩︎

114. Master Nansen’s words are ironic praise. ↩︎

115. Tensho-koto-roku, chap. 8, and Keitoku-dento-roku, chap. 8. ↩︎

116. The two practices should not be seen as separate. ↩︎

117. Suggests the practice of Zazen. ↩︎

118. “Who” means a person who does not have individual self-consciousness. Master Nansen asked about the ineffable state. ↩︎

119. “Equal” is 等 (TO, hito[shii]) which generally expresses the equality or similarity of two factors. At the same time 等 (TO) sometimes expresses the balanced state—as in the phrase 無上正等覚 (MUJOSHOTOKAKU), “the supreme and right balanced state of truth”—so 仏性等学 (BUSSHO TOGAKU), “the Buddha-nature’s equal practice,” suggests the practice of Zazen in the balanced state. ↩︎

120. Master Obaku’s words are 十二時中 (JU-NI-JI CHU), which can be interpreted as “throughout the twelve hours,” or “the reality of the twelve hours,” or “the twelve hours themselves.” 中 (CHU), as a preposition, means “during” or “throughout,” but Master Dogen often uses it as an emphatic suffix to emphasize the reality of the noun which precedes it. ↩︎

121. Master Dogen simply explained the meaning of the Chinese characters in Japanese. ↩︎

122. 露迥迥 (ROKEIKEI) are the words of Master Enchi Dai-an, quoted in chap. 64, Kajo. Here Master Dogen emphasizes that “viewpoint” does not describe only a subjective view. ↩︎

123. Again, Master Dogen clarified the meaning of the Chinese characters of the story with a Japanese sentence. ↩︎

124. For example, we should consider if meals are indispensable or not. ↩︎

125. Master Isan Reiyu (771–853). He is referred to in the commentary as “Dai-i.” ↩︎

126. Master Kyozan Ejaku (807–883), successor of Master Isan. ↩︎

127. Master Dogen esteemed not only the ability to defeat an opponent but also the ability to tame an opponent. ↩︎

128. 異類中行 (I-RUI-CHU-GYO), “going among alien beings,” describes independent action. ↩︎

129. In other words, the whole Universe is a hindrance. “Traps” is 羅篭 (RARO), silk nets and bamboo cages used to trap birds and fish. The words (elsewhere translated as “restrictions and hindrances”) appear frequently in Shobogenzo. ↩︎

130. Master Obaku said 十二時中 (JU-NI-JI-CHU), using 時 (JI) to mean “hours” and 中 (CHU) to mean “throughout the period.” Master Dogen said 時中十二 (JI-CHU JU-NI) using 時中 (JI-CHU) to mean “time itself,” or “real time.” See also note 120. ↩︎

131. Vines clinging to a tree suggests something too complicated to be understood intellectually. See chap. 46, Katto. ↩︎

132. Master Joshu Jushin (778–897), a successor of Master Nansen Fugan. Great Master Shinsai is his posthumous title. ↩︎

133. The conversation is recorded in the second half of Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 2, no. 14. It is also recorded in Wanshi-zenji-go-roku, chap. 1, and Rento-eyo, chap. 6. ↩︎

134. Master Dogen explained the Chinese characters 狗子 (KU-SU) with the Japanese word いぬ (inu). ↩︎

135. An iron man symbolizes someone who is very single-minded in pursuing the truth. The monk was not looking for a simple yes or no, but wanted to ask about the area beyond ordinary thinking. ↩︎

136. In other words, such a severe question. ↩︎

137. Master Shakkyo Ezo (a student of Master Baso Do-itsu) says, “For thirty years my bow has been stretched and my arrow set. I have just been able to shoot half a sacred person.” ↩︎

138. 無 (MU). ↩︎

139. Master Dogen considered various meanings of the character 無 (MU)—real state, lack of possession, and absence. ↩︎

140. The problem of the meaning of 無 (MU) can be solved by following a concrete process. ↩︎

141. “Karmic consciousness” is 業識 (GOSHIKI). 業 (GO) represents the Sanskrit karma, which means action. 識 (SHIKI) means consciousness. 業識 (GOSHIKI) means consciousness which exists in the present as the concrete result of actions in the past. Thus Master Josshu used 業識 (GOSHIKI) to suggest the concrete, real state at the moment of the present. ↩︎

142. 為佗有 (I-TA-U). In the story these words mean “Because it has…” ↩︎

143. In this conversation (recorded in the first half of Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 2, no. 14) the monk’s question is exactly the same as the question in the previous conversation. Understood simply, the conversation is as follows: “Does even a dog have the Buddha-nature or not?” “It has.” “[The dog] has the Buddha-nature already. Why has it forced its way into this bag of skin?” “Because it commits a deliberate violation.” ↩︎

144. 有 (U). Master Joshu’s answer looks like a simple affirmative answer (Does a dog have the Buddha-nature? “It has.”). But Master Dogen’s interpretation is that the word 有 (U) is just the direct preaching of real existence (“Existence!”). ↩︎

145. 有部 (UBU), the Existence School, means the Śārvāstivāda, a school founded by Kātyāyanīputra around 300 years after the Buddha’s death. Generally, Master Dogen esteemed the teachings of the Śārvāstivāda relatively highly; see chap. 87, Kuyo-shobutsu. Their teachings are represented in Chinese by the words 我空法有 (GA-KU-HO-U), “the self is empty, the Dharma exists,” 三世実有 (SAN-ZE JITSU-U) “the three times are real existence,” and 法体恒有 (HOTTAI-GO-U), “the Universe is eternal existence.” ↩︎

146. 既有 (KI-U), lit. “already existence,” means what is there already, real existence. ↩︎

147. When living in reality, is it necessary to make intentional effort or not? ↩︎

148. In several chapters of Shobogenzo, Master Dogen denies (having sometimes also affirmed) that we “enter” reality. See, for example, chap. 17, Hokke-ten-hokke. ↩︎

149. From a poem in Master Sekito Kisen’s book Sekito-so-an-no-uta (Songs from Se-kito’s Thatched Hut). The immortal person in the hut means a person who realizes the eternal state in a simple life. ↩︎

150. A person who is not special. ↩︎

151. Master Ungo Doyo (?–902), successor of Master Tozan Ryokai. See chap. 15, Busso. ↩︎

152. Rento-eyo, chap. 23. ↩︎

153. Master Chosa Keishin (?–868), a successor of Master Nansen Fugan. ↩︎

154. A lay student in Master Chosa’s order. His title 尚書 (SHOSHO) indicates that he was a mandarin charged with promulgating official documents. ↩︎

155. See Shinji-shobogenzo, pt. 1, no. 20. The story is also recorded in Keitoku-dento-roku, chap. 10, and Rento-eyo, chap. 6. ↩︎

156. 倶 (GU, tomo[ni]) means either “both,” or “together.” In his commentary, Master Dogen wonders if the official was able to understand the character in the second meaning. ↩︎

157. The Nirvāṇa-sutra says, “Just as in removing a firm stake, first we move it with the hands, then it comes out easily, so it is with balance and wisdom of bodhisattvas: first [bodhisattvas] move [an emotional interference] with the balanced state, then they remove it with wisdom.” ↩︎

158. “Not dissipated” is 未散 (MISAN). 未 (MI, ima[da]) lit. means “not yet,” but 未散 (MISAN) describes the state which is real at the moment of the present (not related to the past). ↩︎

159. ↩︎