Zen and Zen Classics 2 PDF

R.H.
BLYTH
、 ZEN
AND
ZEN CLASSICS
Volume Two
History of Zen
THE HOKUSEIDO PRESS

TOKYO
HEIAN INTERNATIONAL
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ZEN AND ZEN CLASSICS
Volume Two
Two Moons, by Sengai
& 推甘 W;二〇出 T 來石秋 o 月
Moon of autumn;
Press the eyes,
And two appear!
Two naked children are rejoicing in the

moon, raising their arms, but a third, with a
belly-band, is pressing both eyes. He wilfully
distorts the natural truth of things, their
Buddha-nature, their oneness, and creates
the world of duality and dichotomy.
ZEN AND ZEN CLASSICS
Five Volumes
Vol. I General Introduction, From the Upanishads

to Huineng
Vol. II History o f Zen (Seigen Branch)
Vol. Ill History o f Zen, c o n fd (Nangaku Branch)
Vol. IV M u m o n ka n
Vol. V Twenty-Five Zen Essays
(Christianity, Sex, Society, etc.)
R. H. BLTTH
ZEN
AND
ZEN CLASSICS
Volume Two
History of Zen
THE HOKUSEIDO PRESS

TOKYO
HEIAN INTERNATIONAL
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
© 1964, by R. H. Blyth
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
First Printing, 1964

Sixth Printing, 1982
ISBN 0-89346-205-5
Published by The Hokuseido Press

3-12, Kanda-Nishl]dclio, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo
Heian International, Inc.

P. O. Box 2402, South San Francisco, CA 94080
D edicated
to
S u z u k i D a is e t z
W ho can read
W hat I c a n ’ t w r it e
PREFACE
This volume purports to be the History of Zen from

Eno to Ummon, that is, of the Seigen branch of the
double-forked tree of Zen, but what the reader actually
gets is something better, a selection of the anecdotes
concerning this line of patriarchs. It was from such
stories that the H e h ig a n ro k u , M um on kan , and S hoyd-
ro k u were composed. These three works, as in the case
of a selection of the best poems of the best poets, give
us a somewhat partial and excessively lofty view of
Chinese Zen geniuses. From the failures, and uncertain
ties of great men we can get to know not only more
of their whole character, but more of the nature of
music or art or literature or life or Zen. To understand
the world, we must go beyond it. To understand the
Zen of the Chinese masters, we must transcend them,
and it. This disrespect, this non-attachment to great
ness, is very Zen, and what makes it unique. 4<Who
created God?” is blasphemy or at least impudence and
bad manners in Christianity, but not in Zen. In
ordinary life, to blame or to praise, to be blamed or
to be praised, to lose or to win,—all are disagreeable.
But of the pairs, to blame, to be blamed, and to lose
are the better. By reaction, they are more creative.
The Zen masters are always speaking ill of one another,
so as to avoid the sentimentality of Buddhism, that is,
of human nature. The masters, we must admit, some
times have too strong a desire to win, in other words,
to teach. This again, as Mencius says, is the great fault
of human beings. However, when we take all the anec
dotes, not only those selected in the three great Zen
books, we find the masters sometimes defeated, and
viii Preface
nearly always willing to be so if only their pupils learn
something. As said before, the H e k ig a n ro k u and so on
give us a rather false view of the Zen masters, and un
fortunate in so far as they appear to be always right
and the monks always wrong, or worse still, just dumb,
in both senses of the word. We get the same feeling
from the Gospels, and it is worth noting that what
makes us respect and indeed love Christ more than any
thing else is his reproving one who called him good, and
telling us, “There is none good, but the Garbhadhatu.”
It is usually said that k6an, m o n d 5 , 公案，問答， are
incomprehensible. They are no more, and no less under
standable than the poetry of Wordsworth, the music of
Bach, the paintings of Klee. And suddenly to say, as
almost all the commentators do, when they get into
difficulties with the explanation, that you must do zazen
in order to grasp the meaning, is not untrue, but if so,
why make any explanation at all, since the essence
escapes anyway? What distinguishes Ummon, for in
stance, from Shakespeare and Mozart and Giotto, is the
fact that every man has, or is supposed to have the
Buddha nature, but not everyone has and not everyone
is imagined to have, the poetical nature, the musical
nature, the artistic nature. We are often told of a Zen
master that he had for example a thousand disciples
and of them twenty eight were enlightened. We may
suppose that the remaining nine hundred and seventy
two were lazy or stupid, but we may also suppose that
they, or at least some of them, had no Buddha nature
at all, just as some people, say about ninety eight per
cent of the worlds population, have no musical nature
at all. Enlightenment, seeing into one’s nature, 見性，
is one word, but human beings are infinitely various,
and this man’s enlightenment is not the same as that
man’s, though there may and must also be similarities.
If we ask what the characteristics of a Christian are,
we shall receive an answer from the proper quarters,
but when we use these criteria in judging particular
cases we shall often find it difficult to say, “This man
Preface ix
As, or, is not, a Christian，’’ in the profoundest meaning
of the word.
But, it may be urged, if Zen is the essence of all
religion, including Christianity, and even Buddhism, and
if it is moreover the essence of all art, poetry, music,
and deep life, how can we make these distinctions?
How is it possible that a man should be enlightened,
and yet be unpoetical, unmusical, inartistic? It will
be noted that we have omitted ‘immoral’. This sug
gests that Zen, in the customary meaning of the word,
that is, as the Chinese Zen masters would have used it,
is after all moralistic, or that human beings are so,
rather than musical, poetical, and artistic. The object of
(Chinese) Zen is to transcend life and death, and, really
to live. To die, to rot, and live until we do,—>how to per
form this in the best possible way is the great problem
of life. Zen solves it, not exactly moralistically, but
by dying first, and then living. To do this requires
moral force and stamina. An understanding of litera
ture, good taste in art and music, even humour, have
little to do with it, that is to say, with dying. But living,
after we are once dead, really means being artistic,
delighting in natural forms, entering into the nature of
things through music. Thus, theoretically speaking,
Chinese Zen was a preparation for life by dying, that is,
by giving up our natural greediness, selfishness, ambi
tion, liking-or-loathing. Theoretically speaking, Japa
nese Zen was the application of Zen to living, to daily
life, not the monkish discipline. The Chinese Zen
master’s question was, “Can you die and drink a cup
of tea?” The Japanese was rather, “Can you die and
d rin k a cup o f te a ? " In Zen this double activity is
known as “the sword that kills, and the sword that
makes alive,” 殺人刀活人劍.
What is, or shall be, European Zen? It is the further
vivification, yet another resurrection. Christ said, “Ye
must be born again,” but we may add, “Again and
again.” To be born is to be given a body. To be born
again is to make new use of that body, that is, to see
X Preface
into the life of things, see things, not see behind them.
And every real seeing of another thing means a for
getting of one’s self, the death of one’s own thingness.
The Chinese (and Japanese) Zen monks never gave up
their manhood, their sex, in order to see into the life of
women. The anecdotes of the present volume are of
men, for men. But a man is only a man when he looks
upon, not mountains only, but women also, “With a
loving eye.” A loving eye is a new-born eye, an eye
that has died to its own pleasure merely.
These three stages, Chinese, Japanese, European, in
the history of Zen are, as said before, theoretical. In
Chinese painting of the Tang and Sung dynasties we
can see the application of Zen to art, or shall we not
rather say of art to Zen? Christianity has always had
its death and resurrection. What is lacking is the
mediaeval idea of magnanimity, “great-souledness,” the
ideal man towards whom we must consciously strive
and from whom a good society is unconsciously created.
As in the old mystery religions, every man is to die
and be born again, but he must die in his own special
way, and live in his own special way, for imitation,
conformity, conventionality, is annihilation absolute.
CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE vii
Chapter
I THE FIVE SECTS
GOZU ZEN AND RoAN ZEN 9
ENo AND HIS DISCIPLES (Jinshu —
Kutta Sanzo — Genkaku — Kataku 一
Seigen — Nangaku — S e k ito )........... 15
SEKITO’S DISCIPLES I (Tanka — Daiten
— Choshi — Sekishitsu).................... 22
SEKIT6，S DISCIPLES II (Tenno —
Ryotan — Tokusan — Ganto — Razan
— Meisho —^ u ig a n )........................... 29
VI se ppg .X " 3 ................................. 39
VII SEPP^S DISCIPLES I (Gensha — Rakan
— Ankoku — T a ig e n )...................... 50
VIII SEPP6，S DISCIPLES II (Chokei —
Kyosei — H o fu k u )............................. 57
HoGEN 66
HOGEN^ DISCIPLES ............................... 75
XI YAKUSAN TO SEKISo (Ungan — D ogo). 79
XII SENSU, KASSAN, SH6ZAN .................. 86
XIII ToZAN ....................................................... 92
XIV S6ZAN AND UNGO 104
XV UMMON I ............. 114
XVI UMMON II ........... 125
XVII UMMON III ........... 137
Chapter
XVIII THE SANDOKAI ..................................... 146
XIX THE HOKY6ZAMMAI ............................ 151
XX THE POEMS OF HANSHAN I .............. 159
XXI THE POEMS OF HANSHANII ............. 166
XXII ZEN, MYSTICISM, EXISTENTIALISM . 172
XXIII WAYS, AND THE W A Y ............................ 186
XXIV NATURE, HUMAN NATURE, THE
BUDDHA NATURE, THE POETIC
NATURE .............................................. 190
XXV DEFECTS OF ZEN .................................. 194
EPILOGUE ................................................. 201
INDEX ......................................................... 205
List of Illustrations
Two Moons, by Sengai....................................Frontispiece

Tokusan and Rinzai, by Sengai ......................... 29〜 30
Chrysanthemums, by S en gai.................................119~120
Kanzan and Jittoku, by Sengai ......................... 161〜 162

Chapter I
THE FIVE SECTS
The history of Zen is the history of moments. It

cannot be, like the history of ideas, or even the history
of the freedom of thought, an account of development,
systematisation, criticism, modification, replacement, anu
so forth. Zen seems to become deeper sometimes, shal
lower, broader, narrower sometimes, but there is no
progress of the ordinary kind. It is a history only in
the sense of being a list of names of great men in the
attainment of greatness in words or deeds or manner
of life.
I find no Zen in Buddha, and in Buddhism itself up
to Daruma it is the Hinduism, the animism and panthe
ism of the U panishads that keeps the universe alive, so
that the Chinese Zen masters, with the help of early
Taoism, are able to
kiss the joy as it flies,

And live in Eternity’s sunrise.
Zen as zazen begins with Daruma, 6th century. Zen
as a “philosophy of living” begins with En6, 7th century.
End’s Zen is not Indian, but neither is it Chinese. It
is rather super-national, almost superhuman, though not
supernatural. Eno reminds us a little of Hakurakuten;
like him he would have been at home in Athens, Rome,
Paris, or London. Zen as we now think of it, Chinese
Zen, commences with Baso and his “wild and whirling
words” and “pleasure in being mad,” 奇言畸行 . It attains
its highest with Joshu, 9th century, and Ummon
10th century. (The Zen sect, in the sense of an organi
sation of monks with the purpose of gaining enlighten
2 The Five Sects
ment, begins with Hyakujo, (720-814). It had its swan
song sung in the 11th century Hekiganroku and the
13th century M um onkan.
From the 4th Patriarch branched off Gozu Zen, and
from the 5th Roan Zen.
Gozu Zen showed the tendency towards strange be
haviour which was to be a characteristic of Baso and
his school. Eccentrics were attracted by the absolute
liberty promised by Zen, and those who thus became
free could not but be oddities. Roan Zen also was
characterised by wit and humour. Its adherents avoid
ed imperial patronage, not unknown later. There were
no doubt able and brilliant monks among them, but
both Roan and Gozu Zen did not last long enough to
bring them fame.
The 6th Patriarch had many disciples, of whom five
were the most important, Seigen and Nangaku; Kataku,
Nany6 and Y6ka, “the Five Great Masters of the Sect,”
五大宗匠 .
Kataku Zen came to an end in 841, with the death
of the 5th successor, Keiho. Kataku was for long with
the 6th Patriarch, and Kataku Zen does not seem to
have differed much from that of Eno.
Yoka is known for his S hddoka1 and for his nick-
name “One-night’s-lodging Kaku,” 一宿覚， as he was
asked by the 6th Patriarch to stay a night with him.
Their Zen is very similar.
Nanyo, who is said not to have left the valley of
Nanyo for forty years, had a great number of disciples,
but nothing seems to be known clearly about their Zen.
Like Kataku Zen, it came to an end in the middle of
the Tang dynasty, and we must presume that it did
not go much beyond Eno^ Zen.
It is from Seigen and Nangaku that all the great Zen
masters derive; from Seigen the Ummon, Hogen, and
S〇t?u Sf ] ? 〇lS9 and Nanâku the Igy 〇 and Rinzai,
so that the present Rmzai and Soto schools come from
1. Translated In Vol. I.
The Five Ranks 3
the two chief disciples of Eno.
Eno
Seigen Nangaku
Tozan Rinzai
From Nangaku, it is Baso, Hyakujo, obaku, Rinzai;

and from Seigen, it is Sekito, Yakusan, Ungan, Tozan. To-
zan’s pupil, S6zan,曹山，840-901， probably provided the
first syllable of Soto, which is thus a combination of
Sozan and Tosan; but another explanation is that the
S6 comes from S6kei, 曹溪， the name of End’s temple.
It is not impossible that both accounts are correct.
The Zen of Seigen aiid Nangaku seems to have been
like that of Eno, only more so. Seigen’s disciple Sekit6
wrote the Sandokai, which appears to me not only non-
Zen, but anti-Zen in its resolution of Manichaeism into
a super-theos called Spiritual Origin,霊原 •This develop
ed into the idea of Five Ranks, Goi，五位， established
by Tozan, which afterwards turned into fortune-telling
and superstition like the later Taoism, and was con
demned by Dogen, but then restored to favour. Tozan's
Ifdfcydzammai,宝鏡三昧 2, presages the Five Ranks, which
are explained as follows.
⑴ 正中偏： The Absolute becomes the Relative;

God becomes man.
( 2) 偏中正： The Relative becomes the Absolute;
man becomes God.
(3) 正中来 • The Absolute alone; God is God.
(4) 偏丰室： The Relative alone; man is man.
(5) 襄到： The Absolute as Relative, the Relative
as Absolute; no God, no man.
All this seems to me unpoetical, unpractical, devoid
2. See page 152 for a translation.

4 The Five Sects
of Zen, ununderstandable by the intuition. There is no
doubt a kind of intellectual enlightenment in it, but it
is entirely detached from the senses, partaking thus
of the nature of symbols, in this case the least dangerous,
but also the least interesting, abstract symbols. Zen
too, like everything else human, has had and still has
the tendency to fall into intellection and abstrac
tion.
It is from the other branch of Zen, beginning with
Nangaku, who himself is not brilliant, that Zen makes
its new development, to be precise, from Nangaku’s
disciple Baso onwards. Baso himself had two great
disciples, Nansen and Hyakujo.
Kangaku
Baso
Nansen Hyakujo
Nansen’s disciple Joshu and Hyakujo^ disciple

Obaku and h is disciple Rinzai complete the list of the
greatest Zen masters, and thus we get this (simplified)
genealogy:
Eno
Sei gen Nan^gaku
dt5 Baso
/ kusan Nansen Hyakujo
Ummon Joshu Oblku
Rinzai
Ummon belong to the Seigen, Sekito, Seppo line. Go-
The Five Sects 5
ing back to the Seigen branch, Seigen himself added
nothing to End’s Zen, but Sekit6 has humour and wit,
and ability to enlighten disciples in a practical way.
Sekito had two chief disciples, Tenno (Tienhuang) 748-
807, and Yakusan, (Yuehshan) 751-834.
Seigen
J
Sekito
__ |____________
Tenn5 Yakusan
Tenno^ chief disciple was Ryutan. With Ryutan be

gins the idea of teaching by just not teaching, which
is a development of Daruma’s declaration that he did
not know what Zen was. But the famous blowing out
of the candle by Ryutan, enlightening his disciple
Tokusan by the darkness,—this is orthodox Zen, that is,
monkish Zen, at its best. Compare Stevenson’s poem:
The breeze from the embalmed land

Blows sudden toward the shore;
And claps my cottage door.
I hear the signal, Lord—I understand.
The night at thy command
Comes. I will eat and sleep and will not question
more.
After his enlightenment by having the fire put out,

Tokusan made a bonfire of his sutras. There is no ac
count of any Christian being converted into burning
the Bible. The only Bible that Christians have burnt
is other people’s. Nirvana is the “blowing out” of the
candle of life. Baptism is the Christian equivalent, but
baptism is a prelude to resurrection, and there is no
resurrection in Nirvana. So in Daruma’s wall-gazing,
nothing se谷ms to have come of it. Even En6’s enlighten
ment was an end in itself, but Tokusan and his own
6 The Five Sects
disciples, Ganto and Seppo have a liveliness which shows
that Zen was not nihilism. It had nothing to do with
the pessimism and escapism which drove so many into
Buddhism, but was an escape from this very escapism.
The anecdotes concerning Ganto and Seppo especially
are Zen at its most simple and most profound, so that
we are unable to distinguish their Zen from their activity
in field, forest, or temple. Human history, in the
deepest sense, is the perpetual separation and rejoining
of things and their meaning, and at the time of Ganto,
828-887, and Seppo, 822-908, the life of these monks,
and what it meant cosmically,—no man could divide
the two. The Word was made flesh and dwelt in China
in the 9th century in these men.
Ryutan
I
Tokusan
Gantd Sepp5
From the Seigen branch come three of the five Zen

Sects, the Soto Sect, the Ummon Sect and the Hogen
Sect. Ummon was a disciple of Seppo, and Hogen of
Gensha through Rakan (L ohan) 羅漢 .
Both the Ummon and the Hogen Schools come
through Tokusan, who combined the doctrine of absolute
emptiness with the use of his stick, which was not used
as an instrument of punishment, but for both praise and
blame, since “Whether you manage to speak or whether
you manage to be silent, thirty strokes!” 道得也三十棒.
道不得也三十棒 • The other two sects, the Igy6 and the
Rinzai, come through Nangaku.
The “Five Houses” of Z en , 五家，are not easy to dis
tinguish at this distance of time, but the founders are
quite individual and indeed unique. In the same way,
Saint Paul and Augustine were both Christians, but
different from each other, and still more different from
The Five Houses 7
Seigen
SekitS
Yakusan
Ryutan
Tokusan Tozan
Seppo Sozan
i
Ummon Gensha
Rakan
Hogen
(the records of) Christ. Igyo (Weiyang) Zen was

fantastic, as opposed to Eno^ common sense, and ques
tions and answers are both transcendental. However,
Isan and Kyozan used actions rather than words, and
also employed diagrams, particularly circles, in their
teaching. Even levitation is not eschewed, if we may
believe the records, and there is here a tendency seen
towards magic and superstition. The Igyo Sect was
the first to appear, and died out rather quickly.
The Rinzai Sect was still more March Hareish, and
as violent as the Queen and her “Off with their heads!”
However, there is also the Four-fold Subject and Object,
四料簡， Fourfold Host and G u est, 四賓主， and the Three
Mysteries and Three Essentials，三玄三要.
Soto Zen is more understandable, in the sense that
the problems may be intellectually grasped, though not
intellectually solved, of course. The theory of the Five
Ranks, however, referred to before, is so difficult as to
be (to me) incomprehensible.
^ The Five Sects
Ummon Zen is the most brilliant of all, yet at the
same time quite physical in its spirituality.
H6gen Zen was a very “kind” Zen, which tried as
far as possible to meet the learner-monk half-way. This
may have been partly because the Hogen Sect was the
last to appear, in the 10th century. The others belong
to the 9th, except Ummon, who died in 949, nine years
before Hogen.
Chapter II
GOZU ZEN AND ROAN ZEN
I Daruma Before describing the division

I of the Zen genealogical tree into
II Eka the Northern (gradual) School
I and the Southern (sudden) School
[II S5zan and the flourishing of the latter,
we must go back to the 4th
IV DSshia Patriarch, Doshin, and also to the
5th Patriarch and two branches
which showed much promise and
then withered away. Gozu1
(Niu‘t o u ) 牛頭，594-657, a disciple
of the 4th Patriarch, practically
began a sub-sect of Zen which
continued for about a century.
iEh5 iii When he was nineteen, he had
already gone through the sutras
\ I .
Hoji iv and especially understood the
l H a n n ya S u tra . He is reported to
Chii v have said, “Confucianism is the
law of this world; it is not the
supreme law. With the true view
Kakurin Echu vi of H a n n ya we can make a success
I of our life.” When he lectured
Dokin
on the G re a t H a n n ya S u tra at
.1
Dorin Kenshoji Temple, the listeners
were as numberless as the clouds, and when he got to
The Quietness of Extinction Section, 滅静品， there was ap
earthquake. After becoming a monk he entered Gozui.
i. There were several Gozu^; this one is the first, Hoyu
(F a iu n g ) 法融 •
10 Gozu and Roan
Mountain and lived there in a cave, calling it Yuseiji
Temple, It is said that all kinds of birds brought
flowers to him, and this became a famous koan with
more than fifty answers: ^Before Gozu met the 4th
Patriarch, birds brought flowers to him; why was this?
After he met him, they stopped; why was this?” One
of the shortest answers, by Joshu, to both questions:
“We get tired, bringing in firewood and carrying water.”
This is the work of Zen monks, and Joshu answers in
a kind of haphazard, Alice in Wonderland way, but the
meaning is that the questions are interesting and excit
ing, but there is not any rational answer that we can
give to them, or should want to.
Gozu’s “temple” was always surrounded by tigers and
wolves. The 4th Patriarch, hearing of Gozu, visited
him. At this time he was immersed in zazen and im
perturbably took no notice of the Patriarch, who said
to him, ‘What are you up to?” “I am meditating on
the mind,” replied 6ozu. “Who is he who is meditat-
ing? What is the mind?” asked the Patriarch. At this,
Gozu threw himself at the feet of the Patriarch and be
came his disciple. An anecdote which belongs also to
this time, perhaps, is the following. The 4th Patriarch
went to the mountain where Gozu lived. Entering the
hermitage he pretended to be afraid of a tiger. Gozu
said, “Are you still like that?” “Like what?” said the
Patriarch. Gozu came to a realisation on the spot. In
a letter to Blake, 1848, Thoreau wrote, “If we are timid,
let us, then, act timidly.” The aim of Zen is Mind, not
peace of mind. At this time it was not uncommon for
Zen monks to be on good terms with tigers. Bukan
(Fegkan) S T , the friend of Kanzan (Hanshan) and
Jittoku (Shihte) was sometimes seen riding on a tiger,
so it is said. St. Jerome had his lion, perhaps a distant
relative of that of Androcles. Una also had her pro
tecting lion, but the Zen tigers are different from the
Christian lions.
Another story is that when his monks lacked food
he went to Tanyd (Tanyang) 丹陽， a distant place, every
Hakurakuten 11
morning, and every evening brought back a heavy load

of rice to feed three hundred persons.
The Second Gozu, whose name was Chigan (Chihyen)
智巖， was a man seven feet six inches tall, and a great
warrior. At the age of forty he became a monk, enter
ed Gozu^ monastery, and was later appointed his suc
cessor, dying in 677 at the age of 78. The 3rd in suc-
cession was Eh6 (Huifang) 慧方 • The 4th, H6ji (Fachih)
法持， met the 5th Patriarch of orthodox Zen, K6nin, and
was one of his ten disciples. He afterwards became
the successor of Eho. The 5th, ChYi(Chihwei)智威， who
died in 729 A.D., was a contemporary of Tenno and
Hyakujo. One of his disciples was Kakurin Genso
(Holin H s u a n su ) 鶴林玄素， whose disciple again was
Kinzan Dokin (Chingshan T a o c h i n ) 径山道欽， the
founder of Mdjuji T em ple, 万寿寺. He was a Confucian
at first, but in his twenty eighth year met Genso, by
whom he was “ converted.” He communicated with
Baso. Ddkin’s disciple D6rin (T a o lin ) 道林， became
a monk at the age of nine, took the vows at twenty
one, and studied the Kegon Sutra. Later in life he
enteced the dense pine forest of Mount Shim b6, 秦望，
and did zazen up a tree. For this reason he was called
Ch6ka Z e n ji, 鳥裳，Bird-nest Zenji, and Jakus6 Zenji,
鵲巣，Magpie-nest, by his contemporaries because the
birds and magpies built their nests beside him. A
famous conversation took place between him and Haku
rakuten, who was the Prefect of that district. He said
to him, “You’re in a very dangerous place !” D6rin said,
“You’re in a more dangerous one!” Hakurakuten said,
•Whafs dangerous about being in charge of this pro-
vince?” “ How can you say you are not in danger when
your passions are burning like fire, and you can’t stop
worrying about this and that?” Hakurakuten then ask
ed, “What is the essence of Buddhism?” Dorin an
swered, in the words of Shakamuni:
Not to do any evil,

To do all goodf
12 Gozu and Roan
To purify onself,—
This is the teaching
Of all the Buddhas.
諸悪莫作，衆善奉行，
1
自浄其意，是諸仏教。
Hakurakuten said, “Any child of three knows this.”

D6rin said, “That’s so, any child of three knows it， but
.‘ even a man of eighty can’t do it.”
The 6th and last master of Gozu was Echu (Huichung)
慧忠，769, and with him the school came to an end after
more than a hundred years. It is said by the way that
the Japanese Dengyo Daishi learned Gozu Zen, when
he came to China, from Shukunen Zenji.
What Gozu Zen was may be best seen in the various
ge (verses) of the leaders of it, for example the fol
lowing by the 6th, Echu:
Thoughts and ideas are illusory;
1 Our nature is without beginning or end;
If you understand the meaning of this,

The Ch*ang Chiang will stop flowing of itself.
念想由来幻，性自無終始，
若得此中意，長江当自止。
There is no wise or foolish, no Buddha or common

man; no one possesses anything; all is empty of self
nature; there is no wisdom to attain to; all names of
things are relative, not absolute. It should be noted
—something perhaps more important than all this Bud
dhistic nihilism—that this branch of Zen put into prac
tice what it taught. For example, they were very
“democratic” with birds and beasts, and H6yu and Echii
especially made friends with wild tigers, antedating
Mrs. Adamson by about 1200 years. Upon their death,
the adherents of this sect usually presented their dead
bodies to birds and beasts of prey. What is not entirely
unconnected with this, they had an excellent sense of
humour. Their religion was healthy and mild, without
the violence and sarcasm of Rinzai Zen.
Hasoda 13
One point should be noted. The genealogical tree of
Zen, which is vertical, is of much less importance than
all the (mostly unknown) influences of contemporaries
and dead writers of different sects and even religions
upon impressionable and aspiring monks. Today, 1964,
Zen is dying of its verticality.
Besides Gozu Zen branching from the 4th Patriarch,
Doshin, we have Roan Zen, Laoan Chan, deriving from
the 5th Patriarch, Konin. The founder was Sugaku Ean
(Sungyueh H u ia n ) 嵩嶽慧安. （ His dates are variously
given as 579-706, and 582-709, and he is also said to
have died at the age of 128). Monks and nuns un
attached to monasteries were now ordered to register.
To avoid this he wandered here and there, but also
helped poor and hungry people. He met the Fifth
Patriarch and was certified by him. Summoned in
V Konin
Ean
Hasoda Genkei Ninken
audience by the Emperor K6s6, 高宗， he avoided him

by going round China to all the famous places, and
finally arrived in the mountains of Sugaku, where he
was visited by many monks, including Ejo (Huaijang)
懷譲， who also visited the 6th Patriarch, En6. Among
Ean’s many disciples were Ninken (Jenchien) 仁後， and
Has6da (P otsaoto) 破竈堕 . Ninken was nicknamed T6t6
O sh 6, 騰騰和尙， which means Master Free-lance. Called
by the Empress of the time, he entered her chamber,
was silent for some time, then asked, “Do you under
stand?” “Not at all,” she replied. “I keep my vow
of silence,” he concluded, and left the poor woman
feeling at a loss.
14 Gozu and Roan
Hasoda was a funny sort of chap. There was a
mausoleum in which there was an oven used for the
sacrificial boiling to death of animals etc. Hasoda, to
gether with another monk, one day entered the
mausoleum and broke up the oven with their staves.
From this destruction of the furnaces of Moloch he
was called Has6da, “Oven-Breaker•，’ Compare Po
Chiii^ poem given on pages 36-37 of O rie n ta l H u m o u r.
Roan Zen was a very Bohemian, whimsical thing,
reminding us of Fudaishi, 497-569. Ean used to open
and shut his eyes when asked by a monk about Zen.
Ninken behaved wildly in the places he visited, not
to say before the Empress. The giving of the name
“Oven-Breaker” by Ean to the otherwise nameless monk
who like Elijah broke up the altars of the false gods tells
the same story of the approbation of Zen lawlessness.
Genkei, (Y u a n k u e i) 元挂， another disciple of Ean,
bestowed the commandments, 戒， on the god of the
mountain, showing his animism. However, like Gozu
Zen, Roan Zen was perhaps too free, too existential to
continue. For Zen to be a real sect, a long-lasting one,
freedom had to be largely restricted, indeed reserved
for special occasions only, in a mechanised, monastic
life. Roan Zen continued for about a hundred years.
The Zen of today is certainly inferior to it.
Chapter III
ENO AND HIS DISCIPLES
The division, after the 5th Patriarch, into two schools

is an interesting one. It is usually described as result
ing from the different nature of the Northern and
Southern Chinese, and this is no doubt correct, but it
corresponds much more deeply to the two kinds of
human nature, the two main kinds of human beings
which Lamb characterised as the people who borrow
and the people who lend, in other words, the active
and the passive, the masculine and feminine, the (later)
Rinzai and Soto branches of the Zen Sect.
Jinshii was Dr. Watson to En6’s Sherlock Holmes,
and by sticking to the factual, Buddhist truth, that
we must train ourselves in virtue, improve our charac
ters and taste, he has earned the contempt of all
subsequent generations, whereas Eno, with his (also
one-sided) transcendentalism and denial of anything
obviously so, such as the necessity of polishing a mirror
in order to make it reflect better, and by saying no
when we expect yes, has become the pattern of all
would-be Zen eccentrics. Another peculiarity of End,
more admirable, was his aversion to zazen. Eno seems to
have got his Zen first from cutting (and selling) fire
wood, and then after entering the 5th Patriarch^ temple
by pounding rice (and of course eating it). There are
several anecdotes concerning zazen which pour contempt
upon Jinshu. One is that Jinshu used to tell his dis
ciples to concentrate their minds on quietness, to sit
doing zazen for a long time, and not to lie down as
far as possible. One of them went to Eno and asked
him about it. En6 said, “To concentrate the mind on
quietness is a disease of the mind, and not Zen at all.
16 End and His Disciples
What an idea, restricting the body to sitting all the

time ! That is useless. Listen to my verse:
To sit and not lie down during one’s life-time,
To lie and never sit during one’s death-time，一
Why should we thus task
This stinking bag of bones?
The disciples of Eno and Jinshu were on bad terms,
and spoke ill of one another, but Jinshii himself was a
modest man, and said, “The Fifth Patriarch made En6
the Sixth; was this an accident?” He does not seem
to have been as “stupid,” that is, merely Buddhistic,
as his southern rivals portrayed him. He is reported
to have said that <<rThe whole of Buddhism is con
tained within our minds; to seek for it outside the mind
is to desert our father.” But the Southern School was
far more extreme than this. An Indian disciple of
End, Kutta Sanz6, 崛多三蔵， on passing through a village
found a monk doing zazen in a small hut he had built.
Sanz6 asked, “What’s the idea of sitting here all by
yourself?” The monk answered, “I’m meditating.”
Sanz6 said, “What is this he who is meditating? What
are you meditating on?” The monk said, “I don’t know
what you’re getting at.” Sanz6 said, “Why don’t you
look at yourself, and quieten yourself?” The monk
still looked blank. Sanz6 then asked him, “What school
are you of?” “Jinshii’s,” said the monk. Sanz6 said,
“Even the lowest heretics in the India I come from
don’t fall as low as that! Just to sit emptily and aim
lessly,—what can it profit you?^ It may be seen from
this that End’s Zen and Daruma’s Zen were very dif
ferent, at least as to methodology.
En5
Kataku Genkaku Nany5 Kutta Nangaku Seigen

(Yoka Daishi) Sanzd
Genkaku (Hsiianchueh) 玄覚， was one 〇f the most

famous of En6，s disciples. His meeting with Eno,
Seigen and Nangaku 17
described in the Platform Sutra，1 is perhaps the most

dramatic of Zen encounters. The Shodoka2 remains one
of the best Zen poems of the Buddhist, luxuriant,
verbose type. He died in 713.
Another interesting disciple of the forty three (of
whom details are known of nineteen) is Kataku (Hotse)
荷沢， 668-760. It is said that he studied the sutras,
Chuangtse and Laotse, the Later Chinese Classics, be-
came a priest of Kokushoji T em p le, 国昌寺， and then
went to see the 6th Patriarch at Sokei at the age of
thirteen. The account of this interview, which is given
in the P la tfo rm S u tra , shows master Jinne (Shenhui) to
have been a very precocious and self-assured person.
He remained with the 6th Patriarch several years, and
after making a tour of the famous places of China re
turned to Ch^ngan. Going to the 6th Patriarch once
more, he was certified by him. He propagated the
Southern School Zen in Loyang where at the time only
the teaching of the Northern School was known. Kataku
Zen was of a highly intellectual kind. It was his great-
great-grandson in the faith, Keih6 (K u e ife n g ) 圭峰,
760-641, who divided Zen into five types: heretical
Zen, common or garden Zen, Hinayana Zen, Mahayana
Zen, and the Highest Mahayana Zen.
The two disciples of Eno from whom descend all the
later masters and schools are Seigen and Nangaku.
From Seigen come Sekito, Yakusan, Tanka, Tenno and
so on, and three of the branches of Zen, Soto, Hogen,
and Ummon. From Nangaku come Baso, Nansen, Dai-
bai, Hyakujo, Obaku, Isan, and the two other branches
Rinzai and Igyo. The other groups, Gozu, Hoan, and
the Northern School of Jinshu were forgotten, as result
of the successive appearance of Zen geniuses through
Seigen and Nangaku. However, for a long time the
Southern and Northern Schools persisted, and the
rivalry between them. Sekito^ S a nd o kai was an at
tempt to heal the breach, which disappeared of itself.
1. See Vol. I, page 105. 2. See Vol. I, page 107 ff.
Seigen (Chingyuan) 靑原，who died in 740, [ t
great number of disciples. His Zen teaching wa
and severe. An example: A monk came ^ „
him, “What is the object of Daruma’s coming to
Seigen answered, aHe went off again somewhere. me
monk then said, lil ask you for one or two words ot
wisdom•” Seigen said, “Come closer !” The monk went
closer. “Write it down clearly,” said Seigen. ,
Thoreau says, “Crack away at these nuts of mans
origin, purpose, and destiny as long as you can; the
very exercise will ennoble you一 and you may get
something better than the answers you expect3. He
also writes, “We must repeatedly withdraw into our
shells of thought, like the tortoise, somewhat help-
lessly.’’4
Nangaku (N anyiieh) 南嶽， born in 677, became a priest
when he was fifteen, met Ean, and then studied under
the 6th Patriarch for fifteen years. It was he who was
responsible for Baso’s enlightenment, besides eight
others. He died in 744 at the age of sixty eight. Nan-
gaku is remembered as having been in the Rinzai line
of Zen.
When En6 first saw Nangaku he asked him, “Where
are you from?” “I have come from SQzan (Sungshan) •”
“What is it that corned?” asked En6. “ It is nothing like
a thing that comes,” answered Nangaku. ^Can we at
tain to it by religious exercises?^ queried End. Nangaku
answered, “That is not impossible, but it is impossible
to spoil it in any way.” En6 said, “Just this unspoilable
thing is what all the Buddhas have kept in mind. You
have done the same, and so have I. Prajnatara, the 27th
Patriarch of India, prophesied concerning you that
afterwards you would send forth a horse that would
trample to death the people of the world.”
The last statement is an apochryphal prophecy of the
appearance of Baso,馬祖， “Horse-founder.” “What is
it which comes?” The aim of Zen is not to answer the
3. Letter to Wiley, 1856. 4. Letter to Blake, 1855.

Baso 19
question in w ords, or even in actions, but to be this
“he,” or “it,” or indeed she or they, in other words the
aim o f Zen is to com e. N ever ask a question. N ever
answer a question. DonH even say anything about
asking or answering. “ l!t cannot b e spoiled, or soiled.
D irt is said to b e only matter in the w ron g place, but
from the point o f v iew o f Zen, dirt is just matter in
its place, lik e a diam ond or a cloud.
The use o f the circle, w hich com es from the K egon
doctrine of the Interpenetration of the Six Charac
teristics, 六相義，or 六相円融，is said to have begun with
Nangaku, and was later extended b y the Igyo Sect ( ®
仰） but opposed b y others. Circles and C ow -h erdin g
Pictures and all such adventitious aids are really only
hindrances in the end, and at the beginning.
Nangaku practised the Nembutsu, as it was b y H oji,
法持， fourth in the line o f G ozu Zen, and his ow n Zen
is not quite distinctive enough. The anecdotes are
fe w and not particularly interesting except that o f his
teaching Baso that doing zazen is not the secret o f
enlightenment.
When Baso was living in D em b 6 in , 伝法院，he did zazen
every day. Nangaku, realising he was a vessel o f the
Law, went and asked him, “ Sir, what is y ou r idea in
doing zazen?” “ I in t e n d t o b e c o x n e B u d d h a /’ said B a so.
Nangaku took up a tile and polished it in fron t o f the
hermitage. Baso said, “ W hat is it y ou are d oin g?”
Nangaku said, “ Polishing it to m ake it into a m irror.”
“How can y ou m ake a m irror by polishing a tile ?”
expostulated Baso. “ H ow can y ou becom e a Buddha
b y doing zazen/* retorted Nangaku.
A nother version gives an abstract reproof. Nangaku
asked Baso, “ A re y ou learning zazen or zabutsu 坐佛？ If
it is zazen, w ell, Zen has nothing to do w ith sitting
or lying dow n. If it is zabutsu, Buddha has no fixed
form . The truth, w hich is placeless, is not something
to b e accepted or rejected. Zabutsu is killing the B u d
dha. B eing attached to the sitting position, you can
never attain to the Reason o f Things.” Hearing this
account of the matter, Baso felt as if he had drunk the
elixir of life. Nangaku is remembered more for his
disciple Baso than for himself, a kind of John the
Baptist.
Sekit6(Shiht‘o u ) 石頭， 700-790, met En6 when young,
and studied under Seigen after his death. He went to
Nangakunanji Temple, and built a hermitage on a large
stone like the palm of a hand to the east of it. From
this he was called “ Master Stone-head.” He composed
the S andokai to propagate the teachings of the Sudden
School, at the same time accepting those of the Gradual
School.
A monk asked Sekitd, “What is the inner significance
of Daruma’s coming to the West?” Sekit6 said, “Go
and ask the outside post of the Hall !” • The monk said,
“I don’t know what you mean.” “Nor do I,” said Sekita
An effect has a cause, but what is the (ultimate) cause
of the cause? A cause has an effect, but what is the
ultimate effect? God felt lonely, and created the
universe. Quite possibly, but why did he (suddenly)
feel lonely? •
When H6un (P an gyun) 龐親，met Sekit6 for the first
time, he asked “Who is he who does not accompany
all things?” Sekito put his hand over Houn^ mouth.
Houn suddenly came to a realisation.
This reminds us of Stevenson’s “I will not question
more.” Joshu, in his g oroku, says that when he was with
Sekito, and anyone asked him a question (about Zen),
Sekito would say, uShut your mouth! No barking
like a dog, please!”
One day Sekito was walking in the hills with his
disciple Sekishitsu (S h ijish ih ) 石室， and seeing more
branches obstructing the path asked him to cut them
away. “I didn’t bring a knife,” said Sekishitsu. Sekit6
took out his own and held it out, blade-end first, to
Sekishitsu， who said, “Please give me the other end•”
<4What would you do with it?,J asked Sekito, and Seki-
shitsu came to a realization.
The beginning of the world, and the Day of Judge
Sekitd 21
ment, birth and death, understanding and not under
standing this anecdote, are the same, (although they
are also quite different.) Is not the effect the origin of
the cause, since every effect m u s t have a cause? Cause
and effect are two names of one process, which is
simultaneous. This is the half-fact which Zen makes
us realise, but the truth, the whole truth, is not yet
there. The handle is also the handle, and the blade
is the blade,—but not quite as much as unenlightened
common sense supposes. The blade is the handle, and
the handle the blade, but not quite as much as some
Zen adepts pretend.
Sekit6 asked a new arrival, “Where have you come
from?” “From K6zei (Chianghsi)，” he replied. “Did
you see the Great Ba (Ma) ?” ， “I did.” Pointing to the
stump of a tree Sekito said, uHow is Ba, compared with
this?” The monk made no reply. Going back to Ba
the Master, he told him about this. The Master said,
“You saw the stump and the kindlings; how large was
it?” “ Enormous,” said the monk. “What a Hercules
you must b e !’’ the Master exclaimed. “Why?” said
the monk. “You carried that stump all the way from
Nangaku (Nanyueh) here; isn’t that a Hercules?”
Do things resemble one another, as similes propose,
or are they really quite different, as comparisons sug
gest, or are things identical, as metaphors proclaim?
What is the relation between the great Zen Master Baso
and the stump of tree, a useless thing that can hardly
be used to make a fire? God loves both equally, b u t
do they both love God equally? The most profound
of all English proverbs, the one which has most Zen
in it is, “Comparisons are odious”；it is even better in
Bottom’s variation; “Comparisons are odorous,” that
is, they stink, of un-Zen.
Sekito is remembered for these and many other Zen
episodes, and also because he is in the line of Soto Zen,
Sekito, Yakusan, Ungan, Tozan. Of his disciples twenty-
one became enlightened, the most famous of them be
ing Tenno, Tanka, and Yakusan.
Yoka Nanyo
Dai ten Choshi Tanka Yakusan

kiihiti
Sekishitsu Suibi
Seihei Tosu
G y ito
Chapter IV
SEKITG’S DISCIPLES I
Tanka (T an h sia) 丹霞， 738-824, was the disciple of

Sekit6, and his conduct was strange, like that of Lear’s
Old Man. He learned Zen first under Baso, then went
to Sekito, then studied in a temple of the Tendai Sect.
He is famous for warming himself by burning Buddhist
statues. He enlightened many people and spread the
Zen of Seigen in the northern provinces.
One day, on his way to see Baso, Tanka met an old
man with a boy, and asked them where they lived. The
old man answered, “Above is the sky; below is the
earth!” Tanka said, “How about if the sky crumbled
away and the earth fell to pieces?” The old man said,
“A h ! A h !” The boy drew a deep breath. Tanka
Isan Rinzai
Tenno Kyozan
Ryutan
Toûsan
HP
Taigen Chokei Ge驗sha Kyosei Ankoku Ummon
Kotei Ganto
Rân (Keichin) Kyorin Tozan (Shusho)

Hogen
Zuigan Razan
ioon Rakan Tendai Reiin Seirvo
(Shunin) I I
Eimy5 Ungo Meisha, Seihei
(Enju)
said, “If there were no father, no child would be born.”

The old man and the child entered the mountains and j
were seen no more. '
Strange people meet other strange people, it may be
by some unknown gravitation. The old man gave a
Taoistanswer,butTanka’sn extq u estion w a sa Z en on e.
“Heaven and earth may pass away, but the word of the
Lord abideth for ever.” What is the meaning of the
old man’s exclamation, literally “Blue sky !” and the
boy’s long slow breath? It was an acquiescence in
the inevitable which we find in Laotse and Chuangtse.
Tanka is more dynamic, but the meeting was well worth
recording.
24 Sekito's Disciples l
Concerning Tanka*s burning of the Buddhist images
at Erinji Temple to warm himself, the universal opinion
was that what he did was right, was Zen, but the action
had further repercussions. Suibi (T su iw ei) 翠微， a con
temporary of Tanka, was one day making oblations be-
fore the Rakan, the Buddha’s disciples, when a monk
said to him, “Tanka burned the wooden Buddha, and do
you hold a requiem mass before the Rakan?J, Suibi
answered, “ Even though it was burned, it could not be
burned up completely, and anyway, let me hold a
service if I want to !” The monk persisted, “When you
hold a service for the Rakan, do they come and eat the
offerings, or not?” Suibi retorted, “Do you eat every
day or not?” The monk was silent. Suibi said, “Clever
people are scarce!”
(Suibi was the disciple of Tanka, but little is known
of his life other than a few anecdotes. One is given here.
Suibi asked Tanka who was the teacher of all the
Buddhas. Tanka told him he^ better not take him
self so seriously, and use the floor cloth and broom more.
Suibi took three steps to the rear. “A bloomer !’’ cried
Tanka. Suibi then stepped forward three paces.
“Another bloomer !’’ said Tanka. Suibi raised one leg
and turned round on the other. Tanka said, “You’ve
got it; you defied the other teachers of all the Buddhas.”
Why is a mouse when it spins? To move without
moving is the great art af life. Thoreau says, “The
art of life, of a poefs life, is, having nothing to do, to
do something.’ ’）
I think Suibi, Tanka’s spiritual son, was a swindler,
of the religious type, which always jumps about be
tween the absolute and the relative according to con-
venience. To bow before a wooden image is nonsense;
to desecrate it is nothing. To offer food to the spirits
of the dead or the living or the unborn is superstition,
and Zen, of all s6cts, should hav6 been above such things.
Singing national anthems, saluting the flag, public pray-
6r, bowing at shrinGs, masses, regarding soine things 3S
holy, reading the newspapers, trying to become rich,—-
Daiten 25
they are all folly and vulgarity, and naturally go to

gether.
Another swindler was Tenjiku (T ien ch u ) 天竺， who
was asked about the matter, and replied, “When it is
cold we gather round the hearth by the fire.,> “Was he
wrong or not?J, the monk persisted. “When it is hot
we sit in a bamboo forest in the valley,” said Tenjiku.
More interesting is the following. Dainei (Taining)
大寧， the spiritual son of Razan, was asked by a monk,
“Why did the eyebrows of the monk in charge fall off?”
Dainei answered, “A robber does not break into a poor
man’s house.”
“Eyebrows falling off” means being defeated by
Tanka. Dainei says that Tanka had nothing in his mind,
no prejudice, no justice, no love of truth or Buddhism
or Zen. He was just cold.
The anecdotes about Tanka are very few, perhaps
because he was more iconoclastic than met with ap
proval, or perhaps rather because he was of a simple
and forthright character.
Daiten (Tatien) a disciple of Sekito, is remem
bered only for one or two interesting anecdotes. He
seems to have been of a rather severe character«
A monk said to Daiten, “The waves of the ocean of
pain are deep; how can we make a boat or raft to cross
it?” Daiten answered, “With wood.” The monk asked,
uHow can we transport ourselves across the river of
transmigration?” Daiten said, “The blind are born
blind, the deaf-mutes deaf-mutes.”
Daiten scorns the monk and his questions. Perhaps
it would have been better to dissemble a little, for
Daiten himself was not perfect.
Kanyu (H an yu )韓愈，visited Daiten, and said to him,
“How many springs and autumns have you seen?” Dai
ten held up his rosary, and then asked, <4Do you under
stand?^ Kanyu answered, 4<No, I don,t.,> Daiten said,
“Both in the day-time and in the night-time there are
a hundred and eight.” Kanyu didn’t know what to make
of it, and went back home feeling miserable. His wife
26 Seldto's Disciples l
asked him what had happened to displease him, and he
told her. She said, “Why not go and ask Daiten what
he meant?” The next day, early in the morning, off
he went to the temple, and happened to meet the head
monk at the gate. “Why have you come so early to
the temple?” he asked. “I want to ask the Master
something,” he replied. “What is the cause of your
problem,’’ a s k e d th e h e a d m o n k ,a n d K a n y u to ld h im .
“Ask m e !” said the monk. Kanyu said, “What is the
meaning of a hundred and eight beads?” The monk shut
his teeth together three times. Kanyu met the master
and continued his former questioning. Daiten shut
his teeth together three times. Kanyu said, “I knew
before that Buddhism is all the same.” “Why do you
say that?” asked Daiten. “A little while ago,” said
Kanyu, “I met the head monk at the gate, and he did
the same thing.” Daiten sent for the head monk, and
said to him, <4A while ago, did you explain what Bud
dhism was?” “Yes,” said the monk. Daiten struck
him, and drove him out of the temple.
Cynically speaking, the head monk infringed Daiten's
patent, but beside this natural indignation at (spiri
tually) profitable imitation, and consequent cheapening
of his (Zen) goods, there is the fact that, as Thoreau
says, “Only nature may repeat herself.” Only those
who are quite natural may repeat themselves, but it is
dangerous even for them. To try to be original or
unique, and never to repeat oneself,—this is also as
unnatural as doing something just because you did
it before. The holding tip of the rosary means that a
man is as old as the number of religious, poetical, artistic
moments that he has lived. A Buddhist monk is often
given two ages, his years of life, and the number of
years he has been a monk. For example, Hogen died
at the age of seventy four. His Dharma age was fifty
four, which means that he became a monk, that is, took
the vows, at the age of twenty. Another meaning
of the rosary is shown also by there being a hundred
and eight both in the day-time and at night. The
Choshi 27
rosary is as it is, neither holy nor unholy; like God, it

is the same for ever and ever, also signified by its being
circular. The hundred and eight beads are that num
ber of delusions (the number is arrived at in several
ways of counting). The meaning of the champing of
the jaws three times is that we must cut off perfectly
the notion of time (and place) in order to arrive at
the absolute, from whence we must then transcend both
absolute and relative. Kanyu, who died in 824, is fa
mous for having opposed the Emperor’s superstitious
worship of Buddhist relics. He seems to have been
very interested in Zen, despite a ferocious hatred of
Buddhism. There is an anecdote showing that he knew
how to have his revenge for any defeats by Zen masters.
He said to a monk, “I hear you are lecturing on the
J6r〇Ti 肇論， is that so?” “It is so，” answered th^
monk. “Does this teaching contain something aboul
the Four Unchangeables?” asked Kanyu. “It does,” re-^
plied the monk. Kanyu then took a tea-cup and broke!
it, and said, “Is this changing or unchanging?” The
monk was silent.
Ch6shi (Changtzu)長髭， whose dates are unknown, was
a disciple of Sekito. When he first went to see him Sekito
said, “Where have you come from?” “From Daiyd-
reito, 大庾嶺頭 “Did you succeed in getting any
merit to show from there or not?” Choshi said, *1 had
some success in the end, but could not paint in the eyes
of the Buddhist image.’’1 “Do you want to put in the
eyes, or not?” “I beg you to help me to do so，” said
Choshi. Sekito stuck out his leg. Choshi bowed. Seki
to asked, ^What perception of truth made you bow?>,
Ch6shi said “It was like a flake of snow in a red-hot
fire.”
Ch6shi’s reply, which comes in the 69th Case of the
2 means that nothing remains (of himself),
H e k ig a n ro k u ,1
a reply which I do not myself approve of, since the
1. Gain final enlightenment.

2. In the Introduction, 垂示， £ngo says that a real Zen-man is so.
28 Sekito9s Disciples 1
simile, like all similes, is misleading to misleadable
human beings. _ •
There are several anecdotes concerning Ch6shi, all
interesting, because concrete, “a sort of thought in
sense,” but rather long. Ch6shi’s disciple was Seki-
shitsu (S h ih sh ih ) 石室 • One day Ky6zan (Hsingshan)
杏山， said to him, “I hear you visited Tai San mountain.
Did you meet the Bodhisattva Manjusri?” “I did.”
“What did he say to you?” “He said, ‘The mother and
father who gave you your body are in the rank
grasses.’ ’’ Kyozan made no comment.
This is interesting as another example of the priests’
interest in the people with whom they had cut their
ties of love, and who still lived in deep illusion.
One day Ky6zan (Yangshan) 仰山，was looking at the
moon together with Sekishitsu, and asked him, “Where
does the roundness of the moon go when it becomes
sharp, crescent? Where does the sharpness go when
it becomes round?” Sekishitsu said, “When it is sharp
the roundness is still there. When it is round it is still
sharp.”
This is a rather good example for the difficult teaching
that enlightenment is illusion, illusion enlightenment;
difference is sameness, sameness difference.
Chapter V
SEKITO，S DISCIPLES II
Tenno and Yakusan are im portant in themselves, and

also as leading, respectively, to Tozan and Sozan, and
H ogen and Um m on.
Tenno (Tienhuang) ^ 4 , stopped eating w hen h e was
fourteen in order to fo rce his parents to let him becom e
a monk. A fter studying u nder several masters he cam e
to Baso, and rem ained w ith him tw o years. Then he
visited Sekit6 and got enlightened under him. Later,
he restored and revived T en n oji Tem ple, hence his name.
The end o f his (m onkish) life was interesting lik e its
beginning. W hen he was on the point o f death, the
m onks o f the tem ple cam e and asked him h ow h e was.
He immediately called fo r the tenzo,典座，the m onk in
charge o f fo o d and clothes in a tem ple. The m onk cam e
to his bedside. “ D o y ou understand?” Tenno asked.
The tenzo said, “ No, I don ， t.” Tenno picked up his
pillow , threw it outside, and passed away. This was
the year 807 A.D., six years after the B attle o f M aldon.
Ryiitan (L u n g t a n ) 龍潭， had been w ith his master
Tenno three years, w hen one day he suddenly said to
him, ill h ave been w ith y ou all this time, and receiv ed !
n 〇 teaching from y o u !” Tenno said, uE ver since y o u l
cam e here, w hen have I not taught y o u ? ,> ^Taught m e l
w h en ?” said Ryiitan. Tenn6 replied, “ W hen you
brought tea, I received it from you. W hen y ou brought
a m eal, I received that too. W hen y ou b ow ed to me,
I inclined m y head to you. W hen did I not teach y o u ? ”
R yatan stood there thinking. Tenn6 said, “ W hen y ou
look, just look. If y o u w on der about it, you w on ’t get
to the point.” R yutan was enlightened.
W hen Tokusan first visited Ryutan he said, <4I have
Tokusan and Rinzai, by Sengai
Tokusan holds a staff in his hand, not the

short and handy one he was w ont to use on
his disciples (but never on him self). The
w riting by the side says:
道得不得摁三十棒
W hether you m anage to speak or not,—
T h e same thirty blow s!
T h e rain falls upon the just and upon the

unjust.
Rinzai carries a kind o f spade. One day
there was a (Zen) argum ent and a (Zen)
struggle betw een Rinzai and Obaku. W hen
it was over, Rinzai said,
這裏活埋諸方火葬
E veryw here (else) they are crem ated;
Here, buried alive.
Rinzai means that in other tem ples people

are dead while they are alive, and when they
die their bodies are burned. In this temple,
under Obakn, w e are really alive, and we
die daily, and are buried daily, and are
resurrected daily. T o bury a dead man is
a waste o f time. It is the really living w h o
must gain their life by losing it.
At
30 Sekit6fs Disciples II
heard the name Ryutan (Dragon-Abyss) for a long

time; now I stand before you, but where’s the dragon?
Where’s the abyss? I don’t seem to see them !” Ryutan
said,“Y ou h aven ow seenR y(itan closeathand.” Toku-
san made his bows and departed.
A dragon is not dreadful,—not the real one. An
abyss is not frightening, an infinitely deep one. What
is dreadful is the thought that the universe has not the
power to save itself; what is frightful is the (scientific)
thought that the universe is shallow and limited. It
was this fear that drove Nietzsche out of his mind.
Besides Tokusan, Ryutan had one more well-known
disciple, Rokutan (Letan) •勒渾 but Tokusan was far
more famous. After receiving his enlightenment from
Ryutan he visited Isan and later had many disciples,
among whom were Ganto, and Seppo. He died in 865
at the age of eighty six.
Tokusan’s enlightenment was one of the oddest, for
the immediate cause was “ endarkenment,” the blowing
out of a candle by his master Ryutan as he was about
to take it. Later, Tokusan was asked by a monk “What
is bodhi (salvation) ?” He answered, “Be off with
y o u ! Don’t bring your dung h ere!” Again he was
asked, “What is the Buddha?” “Just an old monk of
the Western World !”
Perhaps no question, especially asked to another, is
anything but disgusting in its insincerity. We all know
what is what, what to do, what not to do, but pretend we
don’t by means of asking questions, questions about the
meaning of life, the existence of God, and the im
mortality of the soul. With regard to the second point,
to understand that Jesus is the Way, the Light of he
World and so on, is not difficult. What is difficult is
to understand that Christ was a carpenter, a man of
sorrows, and acquainted with grief.
When Tokusan was young, he gave lectures on the
Diamond Sutra, but after his enlightenment he used to
drive away with a stick any who entered his gate. This
intransigent attitude was his chief characteristic.
Ganto 31
When he was on a “pngrimage，” that is, visiting great

Zen Masters, he went to see Isan. Carrying his bundle
of Buddhist necessities with him, he entered the Law
Hall, marched from East to West and from West to
East, and gazed into Isan’s private room. Isan took no
notice of him. Tokusan said, “No, there’s nothing to
be got here !” and went out. When he got to the temple
gate he said, “There’s no need to be in such a hurry;
I will go in and see him again more ceremoniously.”
As soon as he had passed the threshold he took out his
cushion and said, “Master !’’ Isan reached for his hossu
(mosquito-whisk, hair-duster). Tokusan immediately
shouted <4Kwatz !,J dusted his sleeves, and went out.
That evening Isan asked the head monk if there were
any newcomers. He replied, “A while ago, someone
turned his back on the Hall, put on his sandals, and
went off.” “Do you know who he was?” asked Isan.
f‘No idea who he was,” the head monk replied. Isan
said, “That chap will make a hermitage on the top of
the peak and will scorn the Buddhas and speak ill of
the Patriarchs.”
Tokusan’s chief disciple, Gant6 (Y en tou ) 巖頭，828-887,
was a friend of Seppo and Kinzan (C h in sh a n ) 欽山，
visited Rinzai and at last Tokusan, by whom he was
enlightened. When he settled down in his monastery
he always told his monks, “At the end of my life, I
will give a great shout, and die.” He was stabbed to
death by bandits in his temple, and uttered a loud cry-
heard for miles round.
A monk asked Ganto, 4<What is the essence of Bud
dhism?^ Ganto replied, uB ig fish eat little
This does not refer to nature “red in tooth and claw,”
but to something that Ganto said on another occasion,
that every thing is movement，動 . （ See page 38.)
Another monk asked Gant6, “When the Three Worlds
are attacking us, what shall we do?” “ Sit still!” said
G anti monk was surprised and s&id, “P168S6 6x-
plain a little more.” “Bring me Mount Ro,” said Gant6,
“and I will tell y o u !’’
32 S e k itd ^ D isciples II
This reminds us two things from the Bible, PauVs

“Having done all things, to stand fa st!’’ and Christ s
faith that will move mountains. Mountains won’t move,
and no one can move them by prayer. The saying of
Christ is to be taken neither literally nor figuratively,
but in the Zen, that is, the poetical way.
Ganto asked a monk where he had come from.
“From the Western Capital,1” he said. “Did you get
hold of the sword?” “K6s6,2黄巣，is dead; I did.” Gant6
came close to him, stretched out his neck, and said,
“Now then !’’ The monk said, “Your head is off.” Gantd
gave a great laugh. The monk later visited Seppo4
who asked, “Where have you come from?” “ From
Gant6.” “Have you anything to tell me?” The monk
told him what had happened. Seppo struck him thirty
times, and drove him away.
We need to exercise care in dealing with this double
episode. "When Gant6 asks about “the sword,” this is
not the physical sword, with its power over the lives
(physical and spiritual) of others. It is not the spiritual
sword, the sword of life and death; it is not a symbol
of spiritual power over others. It is the sword of pure
power, Stevenson’s “a horseshoe, and it rusty”；Blake’s
“grain of sand”；Bash6’s “sound of the water.” It is
that which unites all things, and separates all things.
It is life-and-death. The monk said he had the sword
in his possession. Ganto tested him by putting out his
own neck for the fatal blow. The monk said, “Your
head is already off !” （ “Your life is hid with Christ in
God” ） . Ganto seems to have been satisfied with the
answer, and guffawed with joy. The monk went to
Seppo, who treated him with insult, not to say injury.
It seems that one master approved, the other did not.
Which master was right? Which master was wrong?
Were they both right? Was the monk right and both
the masters wrong? Was everybody wrong? Am I right
1. Ch*ang-an. 2. A merchant who captured Ch*ang-an, and was

then killed by his underlings.
Kazan 33
or wrong? This episode, which, by the way, is the 66th
Case of the H e k ig a n ro k u , is cleverly devised to lead
us to a realm transcending rights and wrongs, but at
the same time we must state our opinion that apparent
ly Ganto was wrong, or the monk was misunderstood
and ill-used by Seppo. It looks to me as if the monk
was proud of his cutting off Ganto^ head, and Seppo
perceived this, and snatched the monk’s cheap and
blunt sword from him.
Razan (L osh an ) 羅山， whose dates are unknown, was
a descendent of Ganto; he first visited Seppo. The most
interesting thing in his life was his manner of leaving
of it. Feeling his end near, he ascended the rostrum,
and for some time opened his left hand; the chief monks
could not understand, and he had all the Eastern side
monks leave. Then he opened his right hand, and told
the Western side monks to go away. To the people he
said, “If you wish to show your gratitude for the Bud
dha’s goodness to you, you can’t be too earnest about
propagating the Great Teaching. Now, go o u t! Go
out V9 He then burst into a loud laugh and died.
Binno (Minwang) asked Razan to give the first lecture
in a temple. Razan ascended the rostrum, took off his
robe, bade them farewell, and came down. Binno went
up to him, and taking Razan by the hand said to him,
“The meeting at the Holy Mountain was no different
from this !” Razan replied, “I thought you were just a
common fellow.”
The “meeting at the Holy Mountain” refers to Bud
dha’s preaching at Grdhrakuta Mountain, when he
silently held up a flower. Binno was showing off his
knowledge of Zen, and Razan seems to be compliment
ing him on it,—a rather “common” scene. Both Razan
and Binno know all the tricks of the trade.
When Razan first met Sekiso, he asked him, <4What
shall we do when thoughts never stop rising and dis
appearing?” Sekisd said, “Be cold ashes and a withered
tree! Spotless purity! First impressions for ten
thousand years ! A box and its lid exactly fitting!”
34 Sekitd*s Disciples II
Razan could not grasp the meaning, and went to Ganto

with the same question. Gant6 shouted “Kwatz !” and
asked, “Who rises and disappears?” Razan was pro
foundly enlightened.
Sekiso adopted what we now think of as Soto strategy,
but Ganto used Rinzai tactics. The fact that the second
was successful in Razan’s case does not of course mean
that the second was in any way superior. We are
doomed
on the torture of the mind to lie
In restless ecstasy,
and, like Razan, we want to escape from it. Sekiso
tells us how to escape, but Ganto releases us, by re
minding us that these thoughts that arise, arise because
they should, and disappear because they should. “Let
them arise and disappear,” says Gant6. The servants
come in and go out of the room, but the master sits
there at ease with his slippers on, and looks at the green
fields and mountains outside the window. Thoreau
writes in his J o u rn a l:
When I am condemned and condemn myself utter

ly, I think straightway, but I rely on my love for
some things. Therein I am whole and entire. Therein
am I God-propped.
Zen is to be whole and entire, while thoughts arise in
their partial confusion and disappear into their mean
ingless nonentity. Zen is to be God-propped, but
“Who,” Gant6 asks, “is pro卯 ed?” “Nobody,” is also
the wrong answer. “Who props us?” Ganto asks.
“Nobody,” is als© Ihe wrong answer.
A monk asked Razan, “Who is the Master of the Three
Realms?*J Hazan answered, “Do you know how to 的 t
rice?”
The Three Realm s, 三界，（ not the Three W orlds, 三世，
which are the past, present, and future) is the Trailokya,
the worlds of desire, form, and formlessnessj one might
paraphrase them, with an extreme simplification, as sex,
Razan 35
art, and Zen. The monk seems almost as if asking about
the existence of God, and Razan's answer is the Chinese
story of the Good Samaritan, but with the Jewish
brotherly love omitted. The Japanese, on their part,
have learned and taught how to eat rice properly, more
especially, how to drink tea properly. But the point is
this: eating rice properly is the master. It is the Master
who eats it properly all the time we gobble it down or
push it in with distaste. This person is a Person, a
non-person, a Non-person, Wordsworth’s “Presence.”
One day Razan went to SenshQ,泉州， and Tan Ch6r6,
坦長老， was making tea on the road. Upon the saluta
tion Tan gave a cup of tea to Razan after drinking some
himself. Razan was just about to drink the tea when
Tan said, “Nice-tasting tea?” Razan spat it out. Tan
said nothing, Razan laughed a great laugh.
This anecdote provides us with a definition of Zen.
Zen is good manners. “ Good manners” means spitting
out food or tea or books or people when they are vulgar,
affected, sentimental, effusive, or humourless, hypo
critical or fanatical,—in a word, when they are what
they usually are. Lawrence writes: “Reject people.
It is like a poison gas they live in, and one is so few
and so fragile in one’s own small, subtle air of life.”
Tan perhaps was a man like the Japanese Baicha 6, u01d
T e a -s e lle r ,1675-1763, of the Obaku Sect, who used to
make tea (then a luxury) by the wayside and sell cups
of it.
Meish6, or My6sh6 (M in gch ao) 明招， whose dates of
birth and death are unknown, was a disciple and
spiritual son of Razan. At his first meeting with Razan,
he jumped to his feet as soon as he had made his bows,
and Razan asked him where he had come from. Telling
him, Meisho asked, uWhat is it that is happening just
at this moment?” Razan saluted him graciously, and
said, “Have some tea !’’ Meisho hesitated, and Razan
said, “It’s a warm autumn day; why don，t you go out
somewhere?” Meisho sighed, and thought that he had
started off full of ambition, and it had all come to this,
36 Sekito's Disciples II
to nothing. The next day he tried again, but Razan

said, “The feathers are not fully grown and the wings
are not strong enough yet; go aw ay!’’ Afterwards,
when he was enlightened, he did not stay in one spot,
but went round the country converting all kinds of
people. At last he settled down in Meisho Mountain,
from which he then took his name, living there forty
years. When he was about to die, he ascended the
rostrum and admonished and instructed the monks.
That evening he stretched out his legs and said to the
monk-attendant, “Long ago, Shaka Nyorai stretched out
both legs, and a hundred treasures of glorious light
were emitted. Tell me, aren’t I emitting some?” The
attendant replied, “In ancient times, the Crane Grove;
today, your honour !’’ Meisho rumpled his eyebrows
and said, “Isn’t some fox making a fool of me?” He
then recited a gatha, sat in the proper way and quietly
and slowly passed away.
After a lecture Meisho pointed to a lion on the Seat
of the Law that wagged its head, and said, UI wonder
what it always wants to tell me?” A monk said, “In
what aeon would it say something to you?” Meisho
said, “Ah, you are still worlds away !’’
Animism embraces not only furniture and toys but
even machines. In Wordsworth certain times have or
are souls; D.H. Lawrence believed in the soul of place.
Every thing is incessantly preaching the truth to us.
There is something special the lion says, that people are
inferior to things in their power to teach. I myself
was born to repeat this truth.
There was a certain monk in Meisho^ temple who
left it and lived by himself in a hermitage. After a
year he came back to the temple and said, “There is
an ancient saying, 4Do not look with the same eyes upon
a man you have not seen for three days!， ” Meisho
bared his breast and said, “ Tell me, how many hairs
have I on this “liver-lid” of mine?，， The monk was
silent. Then Meish6 asked him, “ W hen did you leave
the herm itage?” “ Early this m orning.” “ W hen you
Meisho 37
came here,” said Meishd， “to whom did you intend to

give your three-legged saucepan with one leg missing?”
The monk still had nothing to say. Meisho said,
“Kwatz !”
Any enlightenment which requires to be authenticat
ed, certified, recognised, congratulated, is (as yet) a
false, or at least an incomplete one. We are social
animals it is true, but we must often resist the tempta
tion to share our experiences. Even Kierkegaard wrote
like mad in order to have at least one reader agree
with him.
During his travelling, angya, Meisho went to see
Z6den2 (H siangtien) 象田； though desiring to leave, he
was not allowed to. Meisho said, ul have a question;
if you can answer it, I won’t go; if you can’t, don’t
stop me.” He picked up a hair and blew it away and
said, ‘*What did the ancients mean?” Zoden was silent,
and Meisho said goodbye, and off he went.
This is not a very striking episode, but shows how
the masters of Zen used it in a variety of ways for their
own spiritual comfort.
One of the officials of the temple was the chief monk,
but he never washed. Another of the officials said,
“Doesn’t know the difference between clean and dirty !
Has nothing to do with w ater!” Meisho came down
from his seat, took the water-pot and asked him, “Is
this dirty or clean?” The official was silent. Meisho
dashed the pot to pieces.
This is not the same as Moses breaking the Tables of
Law, but it is not different. Meisho seems to have been
like Dr. Johnson, who “had no passion for clean linen•”
Together with Kyo Joza (Chiao) Wc., and some others,
Meishd was at the house of a certain man, and they were
eating fruit. Meisho picked up a k a n ra n (kanlan)
橄蘭， and called to Ky6. Ky6 responded. Meish6, with
the fruit in his hand, said to him, “How can you get
2 . There seem to be no accounts of the life of this “ Elephant-

field.”
38 Sekitdfs Disciples II
hold of this?” K y6 reached over the table and grabbed
it. Meish6 said “Kwatz !，， and added, “ Once dead, never
resurrectsd !’，
Greediness, acquisitiveness, what is called in Bud
dhism upadana, is the ninth of the Twelve Nidanas,
links in the chain of (unpoetical) existence. In the
Buddhist ^ em blem s,it is represented by a couple in
sexual union. Meisho says that once this ^snatching at
existence, at things, has been given up, it never re
turns. While it is not given up, it never ceases to
plague us.
Meishd was not, like Ummon, a Zen genius, but he
had his own Zen, and showed a tendency to move in
the direction of Japanese Zen, in that he applies Zen
to the ordinary affairs of life, and castigates those whose
manners are bad, who flatter, or equivocate. He has
not yet, however, the specially Japanese form of Zen,
universal good taste.
Zuigan (J u iy § n ) 瑞巖， dates unknown, became a priest
early in life, and was enlightened by Ganto, and then
learned under Kassan. He sat every day like a fool,
on a flat stone. He used to call to himself, and answer,
saying, “Don’t let yourself be laughed at by those who
come after you Vf
Zuigan asked Ganto, 4<What is the Eternal and Funda
mental Principle of ThingsT^ Ganto replied, “Move
ment.” Zuigan asked, “What is this ‘movement’?’’ Gan-
t6 said, “ [When you see things move,] can’t you see
this Eternal and Fundamental Principle of Things?”
Zuigan was lost in thought. Ganto said, uIf you agree
to this, you are still in the dust of this world; if you
disagree, you will be always sunk in life-and-death.”
Thinking means deciding one way or another. Zen
is deciding both ways. When we see the movement of
things, they are not this, but that, and not that, but
something else. In this sense, much of Shelley^ nature
poetry is a good introduction to Zen.
Chapter VI
SEPPO
Sepp6 (H siiehM ng) 雪峰，822-908, like Gant6, was a

spiritual son of Tokusan; his own disciples were said
to be not less than 1500, of whom those who were en
lightened numbered 42. The most famous of his dis
ciples was Ummon. Seppo comes in the 13th Case of
the M u m o n ka n . He laboured hard as a cook, and carried
a ladle with him wherever he went. The number of
anecdotes concerning Seppo is extraordinarily large.
The following are some of the most interesting.
Seppo was cutting trees one day with Chosei
(Changsh§ng) 長生， and said to him, “When you cut,
cut to the heart, then stop.” Chdsei said, “I have cut and
finished !” Seppo said, ^Former masters transmitted the
truth from mind to mind; would you really say that
you have cut and finished?” Chosei said, throwing the
axe to the ground, “It is transmitted !” Seppo struck
him with his stick.
In general we may say that a (verbal) question should
have a physical answer; throwing the axe to the ground
was enough, provided it was thrown properly, and say
ing <4It has been transmitted, is legs to the snake. This
is not mere addition of unnecessary ornament, but the
deformation, the denaturalisation of a living organism.
A little too much, or not quite enough,—and what
worlds away in the regions of religion and a rt! Also,
we may say, Chosei was too definite in his assertion.
We should be definite about (apparently) indefinite
things, and indefinite about (apparently) definite
things. Actions, on the other hand, should always be
definite. By their finity they attain infinity.
When Seppo was at Tozan^, he was the cook, and
40 Seppo
every morning he gave the congregation of monks their
gruel at the same time, irrespective of the weather.
T6zan said to him, “How can you always tell what
time to give the gruel?” Sepp6 answered, “By the
stars and the moon.” T6zan persisted, “But when it’s
drizzling, or mist hangs over the sky, what do you do
then?” Seppo made no reply.
We may explain this in two ways. Seppo no doubt
had a clock in his belly. I myself have one, but Seppo,
living such a regular life, physically and spiritually,
could tell the time at almost any moment of the day.
This is the psychological explanation, but one with more
Zen in it is the following. When we live the life of
Zen, for twenty four hours a day, eighty odd years a life,
we must answer people according to ordinary so-called
common sense. If we are asked, “What day of the week
is it?” we must not answer, “There are no days of the
week in the universe!” or be silent, or shout “K watz!”
However, once is enough; we are not required to answer
fo o ls a c c o r d in g to th e ir fo lly r e p e a te d ly .S o w ith D r .
Johnson, who became angry in the end and said, “I will
not be put to the question !”
A monk said to Sepp6, “The seeing into his nature
of a Sravaka1 is like gazing at the moon at night;2 a
bodhisattvas seeing into his nature is like the sun in
the day-time.3 uMay I ask what y o u r seeing into your
nature was like?” Seppo struck him three times with
his stick. Afterwards the monk went to Ganto and
asked him the same question. Ganto cuffed him three
times.
To ask another person about his satori is like asking
how much money he has in the bank, or whether he
loves his wife. Good manners applies to all things with
out distinction. Indeed, Zen is good taste, or rather,
good taste is Zen. Perhaps, after all, beating and slap
ping is the only way of improving a person^ taste,*3
!• A disciple o f the Buddha. 2. Passive, s©lf-saving,

3. Active, world-saving.
Joshu 41
religious and artistic. This is the profound meaning of

existentialism. The more we suffer, intelligently, the
deeper our life. Buddha said that life is suffering, and
taught us how to avoid both. This was wrong. Deep
suffering is deep life. Shall we then be shallow, and
dry up altogether?
A monk asked Seppo, <4How about when the old
valley water is a cold spring?” Sepp6 answered, “ Stare
into it as you may, you can’t see the bottom !” The
monk said, “What about when we drink the water?”
Sepp6 said, “It doesn’t go in the mouth.” The monk
went to Joshu and told what had been discussed. Joshu
said, “If it won’t go in the mouth, it won’t go through
the nostrils.” The monk then asked, “How about when
the old valley water is a cold spring?” Joshu said,
“How disagreeable it is !’’ The monk said, “What about
drinking it?” J6shu said, “You will die.” When Sepp6
heard of this conversation, he said. Joshu is one of
the ancient Buddhas,” and made obeisance to him from
a distance. After that, he answered no question him
self.
This is one of the most difficult and one of the most
profound Zen dialogues. The old well is full of cold
water, of an inexpressible colour, clear, but inpenetrable
to the eye. Suppose we make this world our own,
assimilate it to ourselves? This cannot be done by a
mere animal resignation. The monk was not satisfied
with this negativistic answer and asked Joshu to go
deeper into the matter. Joshu simply agreed with
Sepp6, and said, “It can’t be absorbed thoughtlessly
either.” But the monk persisted, and asked once more,
‘What do you think of this million-year old, im
placable universe?” J6shu replied, “ It’s a terrible
place V9 The monk said, “How about becoming one
with the bitterness, and thus eliminating it?” Joshu
answered, “The universe is always dying, and unity
with it is a kind of crucifixion.” When Seppo heard
of this, he realised his previous shallowness, and bowed
before an enlightenment far greater than his own, a
42 Seppo
sort of blindness from excess of light. Nirvana is often

taken as a condition of supreme joy. But it is also
that of supreme sadness. The point anyway is not the
joy or sadness, but the supremeness.
One day Seppo sat down on his seat, and all the monks
assembled, and Seppo rolled along a wooden ball.
Gensha went after it, and put it back in its original
place.
To roll a ball is to see the ballness of the ball, its
woodenness; and the woodenness, the levelness of the
floor; the roundness of the earth, its pullfulness; the
desire of the ball to roll, its desire to stop rolling. But
besides this spontaneous willfulness of nature there is
the thoughtful control, the orderliness, the infinite
finality of man. In these two, which work together
undivided, yet always separately, as in Seppo and
Gensha, is seen Universal Activity, the Buddha nature,
Godhead.
Another anecdote concerning Seppo and Gensha is
the following. Gensha sent a letter to Seppo by one of
his monks. Seppo ascended the rostrum and opened the
letter-case, which contained three sheets of blank paper.
He showed these to the assembled monks, and said, “Do
you understand?” After waiting a while, he added,
“Don’t you see what this gentleman is saying to me?
We are a thousand leagues away, but the same breeze
blows on us !” The monk went back and told Gensha
what Seppo had said. Gensha exclaimed, “Doesn’t that
old chap know when he’s going too far?”
Evidently Seppo intended to use his former disciple^
letter as a sort of text to teach his monks, and was
agreeably surprised to find nothing but blank paper.
His monks however did not share his chortles of
delight, but sat there glumly like a lot of Dr. Watsons.
“Elementary !” said Sherlock Holmes, but this of course
made the monks still more dull. (Unconsciously， this
was no doubt Sepp6’s intention.) “We are two birds
of a feather，” he declared. The messenger-monk went
back and told his tale to Gensha, who, embarrassed by
Enkan 43
such sentimentality on the part of his old teacher said

in jest what he felt in earnest. The two points to be
noted here are first, that though the paper was blank,
it was something; it was not nothing at all brought by
nobody. In Zen also, ex nihilo nihil; there must be
expression, whether in words or (positive) absence of
words. Pure spirituality, like anything pure, is null
and void. The second point is the affection, we may
call it love, Zen love, between those two Chinese men.
Their love, like all true love, is not between persons,
but between persons and something else. I love you,
for you love what I love, and in this sense only is the
romantic assertion true, that real love cannot be un
requited.
Sepp6 first visited Enkan (Y enkuan) 塩官， then T6su
(T outsu) 投子， three times, and T6zan nine times，with
out result, and at last asked Tokusan，“Is it possible
for me too to share, with the patriarchs, in the Supreme
Teaching?” Tokusan struck him with his staff，saying,
“What on earth are you talking about?” The next day
he asked for an explanation. Tokusan said, 4<My re
ligion has no words and sentences; it has nothing to
give anybody.” At this Seppo became enlightened.
Enkan, dates unknown, a disciple of Baso, is known for
the anecdote of the Rhinoceros Fan. He told a monk to
fetch his fan. The monk said, “ It is broken.” “If it’s
broken, then give me the rhinoceros,” said Enkan.
The monk had no reply. By saying, “It is broken,” the
monk meant that the fan was “ empty” of real being.
Enkan agreed, then asked the monk to show the reality
of things, but the monk could not. He understood that
色 is 空， “All things are devoid of self nature,” but not
that 空 is 色， “All abstractions are concrete.” At this
time Shifuku (Tzufu)1 資福， was present; he drew in
the air a circle, and within it the character for cow,
牛， which forms part of the character for rhinoceros,
厚 . By so doing he acted the fact that “All concrete
things are abstract，’’ 色 is 空， and that “Transcendentals
are material,” 空 is 色 . T6su, who died in 914， was a
44 Seppo
disciple of Suibi, third in succession from Seigen. In

the original story, Tokusan says that Zen is wordless,
and that it is not something. Zen may be words. All
living, poetical words are Zen. Zen is not, however, the
meaning of the words. It is the words themselves, with
their meaning not perceived separately from the words.
Zen also is not something which can be given or re
ceived. Love is the same. We can^ give love to God;
God can’t give it to us. God is love. When we really
know, with our body-mind, that there is nothing we
can get or bestow, borrow or lend, hold or lose, that we
can’t forgive or be forgiven, save or be saved (think
of The M an w ho D ie d ) we know Zen, but we don,t
know what it is, because it isnH a what.
A monk said to Seppo, ul have shaved my head, put
on black clothes, received the vows,—why am I not
to be considered a Buddha?” Sepp6 said, “There is
nothing better than an absence of goodness.”
The difference between religion and morality, be
tween poetry and emotion, between music and senti
mentality, lies here. “Judge not” is usually taken to
mean, “Do not condemn others,” because you will be
yourself condemned. “Judge not” means, “Do not judge
your own actions or those of others good or bad, ap
prove or disapprove of them.” We must have no
principles, no standards, no values. It is true that
everything thus becomes wildly subjective, but it can’t
be helped. You must believe that your real nature is
no different from the nature of things, and must some
how try to get at it. This is how, Seppo says, you may
become a Buddha.
Repairs were being made to the temple, and Seppo
himself was carrying a bundle of wistaria twigs. Meet
ing a monk on the way, he put down the bundle, and
stood there with folded hands. The monk was about
to take up the bundle when Seppo kicked him down.
Returning to the temple he told Chosei (Changsheng)
長生， about the incident, saying, “When I kicked him
over, I had a wonderful feeling.” Ch6sei said, “You
Tozan 45
should become that monk and go to the Nehando4, and

then you would get something.” Seppo went off with
out a word.
Zen is above morality, but morality is not below
Zen. Seppd’s relating the incident shows he felt uneasy
about it. Punishing, teaching, training, such things
almost always give tis this same uneasy feeling. When
we think of Bokuju’s breaking Ummon’s leg, Nansen’s
killing the cat, (the 15th century) Kanzan’s mother
throwing him in the river, we get this uneasy feeling.
Mere Zen is not enough. It must be intelligent, sensitive,
tasteful, courageous, modest, un-inferiority-complicated,
non-hysterical, extreme Zen.
While Seppo was with Tozan, being in charge of the
kitchen, he was boiling the rice. T6zan asked, “How
much rice are you cooking today?” uTwo bushels,n re
plied Seppo. “Will it go round?” asked T6zan. Sepp6
said, “There are some who don’t eat.” Tozan said,
“Suppose they suddenly all eat, what then?” Sepp6 had
no answer.
This suppositious case is a mild way of doubting the
goodness of the universe, the benevolent intentions of
the Deity. Suppose there is a whirlwind, suppose you
die, suppose Buddha had not been born, suppose Christ
had not died for us, suppose the universe is annihilated,
_ what becomes of (your) religion then? This is the
problem in Stevenson^ F a ith , H a lf- fa ith , and No F a ith
a t A ll, the last of which means religion, morality, Zen.
The Old Hover answers by going off with his battle-axe
to fight for Odin, who is going to be defeated. In the
above story, by saying “ Some don’t eat,” Sepp6 may
be referring to That which does not eat, which, like
Jehovah, it is death even to see. The next episode deals
with this.
Seppo was saying good-bye to Tozan, who asked him,
“Where are you off to?” Sepp6 answered, “I’m going
back to Reichu.>, “At that time, what road did you
4. See page 85.

46 Seppo
come by?” “By Hienrei.” “And by what road “are you
going back?” “ The same road, ，，Sepp6 said. <<Do y°^
happen to know the One who never leaves Hienrei?”
“I don’t know that One，” replied Sepp6. “Why yot?
“Because the One has no personality.” T6zan said, You
say that you don,t know the One,— if so, how do you
know that the One has no personality?”
T6zan’s ob ject here is to teach Seppd that his “ not_
knowing^ is defective, half-hearted. “Be absolute for
death/* says the Duke in M easure fo r M easure. In the
same way Zen cannot assert that there is no God, or
that the Ultimate Reality is not personal. It has no
more right to deny than to assert. In fact, the best is
to assert everything, to agree with everything, the more
contradictory the more whole-heartedly.
Seppo asked a monk where he had come from. “From
K6zei,” said the monk. <4Did you meet Daruma any-
where?” asked Sepp6. “I just left him,” replied the
monk.
This anecdote is a refreshing change from the usual
reduction of the monk to a half-imbecile silence. The
monk has learned to play the Zen game, and airily
displays his virtuosity. Though not very profound, it
is perhaps superior to ping-pong and such sports. The
following is a little better, showing that even a worm
will turn.
Sepp6 asked Ky6sei (C hingching) 鏡清，“What part
of China do you come from?” He answered, “I won’t
say I am from Unshii.” Seppo said, ul wonder when
you will be of the same country as One-Night's-Lodg-
ing-Kaku !” Ky6sei said, “Tell me, what part of China
did One-Night’s-Lodging Kaku come from?” Seppo
said, “I will forgive you the twenty stripes.”
Kyosei, dates unknown, came from the same part of
China as Yoka, that is, One-Nighfs-Lodging Kaku.
Kyosei lived with Seppo a long time. We have all come
from the same country,—Wordsworth says, uFrom God,
who is our home, but so many people think they are
from Bolivia or Essex or Timbuctoo. Occasionally we
Juliana 47
meet people who know where they really come from;

it is bad manners, however, to ask them.
After Seppo became famous, he opened his own
temple, and the monks attending were about fifteen
hundred. He used to meet people with his three
wooden balls, and when a monk came to be taught he
would roll them out. We are reminded here of W. C.
Fields, the drunkard-acrobat-humorist. Fields would
use his hat, Seppo his three balls. Both were teachers,
teachers of Zen. I have learned from both.
One day Seppo stretched out his arm, clenched his
fist before a monk’s face, and said to him, “ The universe,
ordinary people, saints, men, women, priests, laymen,
mountains and rivers, the great earth,—all are con-
in this one clenching of the fist.”
are contained in every clenching of every fist.
What then is the difference between the ordinary man’s
clenching of his fist, and Seppo^? Simply that Seppo
is conscious of it,—but not self-consciously conscious.
Seppo said to the assembled monks, “Pick up the
whole universe between your thumb and forefinger, and
it is like a grain of unhulled rice. It is thrown down
before you; your ignorance of it is pitch-black. Strike
the drum, and let all the monks go about their work !J,
Six centuries after Sepp6’s declaration we have the
following, from Juliana^ Revelations of Divine Love:
He shewed me a little thing, the quantity of an

hazel-nut, in the palm of my hand; and it was as
round as a ball. I looked thereupon with the eye of
my understanding, and thought: What may this be?
And it was answered generally thus: It is all that
is made. I marvelled how it might last, for me
thought it might suddenly have fallen to naught for
littleness. And I was answered in my understanding:
It lasteth, and ever shall, for that God loveth it. And
so All-thing hath the Being by the love of God.
When we put these two passages side by side, we see
that the differences between them are far greater than
the obvious similarity. But the point to remember is
48 Seppo
that we need both, and not one more than the other.
In this sense, and in no other sense, two different things
are one thing; a Chinese Zen man and an English
Christian woman are indistinguishable; the great
universe and a nut or grain of rice are identical.
A monk brought up the statement by Seppo to Kokyu
(Huch‘iu> 虎丘， died 1136, a disciple of Engo. Kokyu
answered, “In one furrow of earth there are three
snakes, and nine mice.” The monk said he would like
Kokyu to explain once more. Kokyu said, “It’s not
easy to describe the sea with the mouth.”
As Seppo had expressed the identity of opposites
(large equals small), Kokyu expresses the ordinariness,
the factuality of things, and then says, “I give up !”
A monk asked Seppd, “What is the Dharmakaya?”
Sepp6 answered, “Karma arises from the mouth, I know,
but must you chew a shit-stick?”
This is a very violent, but not too violent way of
telling people that their interest in religious matters
is pretended, is argumentative, or escapist, or halluci
natory, or perverted, in a word, is not religions. Seppo
says, truly enough, that such questions are nauseating
and odious. “The Dharmakaya, the Essence of Being,
is divided into u n ity, 総， and d iversity, 別， noumenal
absolute and phenomenal activities.” All this kind of
thing makes a healthy person feel sick.
A monk asked Sepp6, “Is the Zen teaching and the
Buddhist teaching the same, or different?” “The voice
of the thunder is not heard within the room,” answered
Seppo.
Zen is the religion of nature; Buddhism is the Ten
This and Five That, the dividing and subdividing of
truth. Amid all this circumlocution and chattering,
the simplicity of truth, its materiality, its thusness, is
lost to ear and eye and nose.
A monk came and bowed to Seppo. He hit him five
times. Tlae monk said, “What did I do wrong?” Sepp5
hit him another five times.
“Why was this man born blind?，， The monk was
Christ 49
struck five times for having committed the sin of being

born (blind). He was then struck five times for
(blindly) asking a foolish question. Christ answers,
“That the glory of God may be manifest,” and healed
him. Seppo has (we may hope at least) the same in
tention. Both Christ and Seppo are also committing
sin, in trying to interfere with the course of nature.
When we know this, and beat or are beaten, there is
ho sin.
Chapter VII
S E P P O ’S D IS C IP L E S I
When Gensha was young, his father was a fisherman,

and being already an old man, one night fell from the
boat into the water. Gensha tried to save him with an
oar, and at this moment saw the moon reflected in the
water. He exclaimed, “I remember how the sages of
old said that all things are like the moon in the water.
If my father had lived, he would have only increased
the pains of the Hell he would be reborn in. Instead,
I will cut off my human relations and become a priest
and thus fulfil my filial duties.” Gensha found a
teacher and took the vows, and the next night his father
came to him gratefully in a dream, and said, “My son has
become a priest, and I have been born in the Heavens,
so I have come to thank him.” Gensha entered the
priesthood at the age of thirty. He studied first under
R e is M , 霊州， then under D6gen (T aohsiian) 道玄. He
and Seppo were fellow-disciples, but Gensha regarded
Seppo as his teacher, whom he succeeded, and then
taught Zen for thirty years. He had about eight
hundred disciples, of whom thirteen attained enlighten
ment.
When Gensha was still only one monk among the
rest, a fellow monk K6 (K u a n g ) 光， said to him, “If
you can understand what Zen is, HI eat my hat !,n
After Gensha became a master, he sent a letter to Ko,
saying, “How did the hat taste?” K6 did not reply.
The relation between Gensha and Ko was all that
it should be. The enlightenment of Gensha seemed
unlikely, but it happened. Gensha did not consider K6，s1
1. What he actually said was, “I’ll make an Iron boat and sail
away over the sea in it.M
Gensha 51
feelings but continued the conversation of many years

ago. Ko did not apologise, for Nature never apologises,
neither did he congratulate Gensha on the inevitable.
He was gracefully silent. It is interesting to note that
just as in Christianity saints never claim to perform
the miracles attributed to them by others (and perhaps
even believed in themselves), so people never say (tI
am enlightened.” Christ declared that only God is
good. Gensha’s indirectness is thus one more example
of the fact that good manners is the ultimate test of
Zen or anything else.
A monk asked Gensha, “The old masters, when they
raised the gavel or lifted up the mosquito brush,—
did they thus bring out the essence of Zen?” “They
did not,” said Gensha. The monk then asked, “What
was the meaning of their actions?” Gensha raised his
mosquito brush. The monk asked, “What is the essence
of Zen?” Gensha said, ‘When you are enlightened you
will know.”
Have all men the Buddha Nature? What is the Bud
dha nature? The Buddha nature is to know (poten
tially, subconsciously, in practice) that we have the
Buddha nature, to know too when we ask questions,
that they are foolish, and the answers to them more so.
This ^knowing^ is not that something is known; some
thing is always about to be known. We are eternally
just going to have the Buddha nature. We haven’t
exactly not got it, but not exactly have it. To go back
to the original question: have all men the Buddha
nature? We may ask a second question, a question
which is more congruent with the first than most people
suspect: have all men a sense of poetry, a sense of
humour? If we answer yes, we look like fools; if no,
ill-natured. Gensha answers, “If and when.” The
Christian religion says that some cannot be saved, either
by the will of God (Calvinism) or by their own.
One day Seppo and Gensha were mending a fence
together, and Gensha asked, “What is the meaning of
Daruma’s coming from the West?” Seppo shook the
52 Seppo's Disciples 1
fence. Gensha said, “Why do you go to such a trouble
about it?” Sepp6 said, “How about you?” Gensha
said, “Pass me the basket.”
To ask about the essence of Zen, that is the meaning
of life, while working is the best time for asking, for
it shows just how closely wedded, that is, undivorced,
our thought and activity are. Seppo shook the fence
he was mending, but this had something forced and
non-natural in it. “Pass the basket, and let’s go on
with our w ork/ ，一 this is the very coming of the Holy
Spirit promised by Christ.
One day while Gensha was thinking, he heard the
voice of a swallow, and said, “How well it has explained
the Buddhist Truth, speaking profoundly of the Real
Nature of Things V} and came down from his seat.
Afterwards a monk, wishing to get some profit from
his words, said to Gensha, “I didn’t understand what
you meant.” Gensha retorted, “Be off with you ! How
can anyone trust you !’’
I have been asked many questions in my life about
poetry, religion, life, and I have given precisely the
same number of answers, but I have never, I repeat,
never, satisfied a single interlocutor. Why was this?
Because all questioning is a way of avoiding the real
answer, which, as Zen tells us, is really known already.
Every man is enlightened, but wishes he wasn’t. Every
man knows he must love his enemies, and sell all he
has and give to the poor, but he doesn’t wish to know
it,—so he asks questions. Gensha^ reply to the ques
tioner is too kind; he should just say, uLiar Vf
Gensha was one day eating cakes with General I (Wei)
韋. The general said, “What is that which we use
every day, but don’t know it?” Gensha picked up a
cake and said, “Have one !，， The general took it and
ate it, and then repeated his question. Gensha said,
“We use it every day, but we don，t know it.，，
This anecdote is very similar to the former one.
Gensha answers the real question, which is asked by
the general’s stomach, bowels of cleverness. The Jewish
Rakan 53
answer was, “Underneath are the everlasting arms,”

but people then gabble about anthropomorphism, or
worse still about comparative religion. One great ad
vantage of the Zen bun-eating answer to all theological
questions is that you can hardly go to war about it.
Perhaps this is the Zen way of abolishing war, the
generals, and, still more dangerous, the privates !
One day Gensha said, “In the deep mountains, and
inaccessible peaks where for a thousand years, for ten
thousand years no man has never trod,—can we find
Buddhism there or not? If you say. yes, what kind of
Buddhism is it? And if you say no, then Buddhism is
not universal.”
This is indeed a dilemma, perhaps the dilemma. No,
is the common-sense answer. Yes, is the pantheistic,
and the (false) Zen answer. The only reply we can
give is the opposite to that expected, and the opposite
to the one we gave the day before. But to say, like
Buddha, that such questions are not conducive to the
good life, and should not be asked,—this is untrue. They
must be asked, vehemently, and answered, vehemently.
That is why Gensha asked his question.
monk asked Gensha, “The Supreme Doctrine,-
I there any explanation of it recently?” Gensha said,
_____
l “We don’t hear such a thing often.”
' This grim understatement nullifies all the books on
Zen that ever were or will be written. Zen is how
things are said, or heard, but also how they are not
said, and “ those unheard are sweeter.” To talk with
Zen is not uncommon, and talking about Zen is more
common than it should be, but to talk with Zen about
Zen,—it is the rarest thing in the world.
Rakan (L o h a n ) 羅漢，867-928, entered the temple in
his childhood, became a monk, and studied under Ungo,
Seppo, and other masters; finally he went to Gensha,
by whom he was enlightened, and whom he succeeded.
He is more famous for his own successor, Hogen, than
for himself.
The few anecdotes told of him seem to suggest a
rather morose disposition (There are several Rakans,
this is Keichin (K u eich §n ) 桂琛） .
A monk said to him, uWhat sort of traditional teach
ing has Rakan?M Rakan answered, uFind out by look-
ing at my outside and inside!”
Does a man do that when we are not looking at
him? Does he do this because we are looking at him?
How did Chrises fart smell? What would Buddha do
if a crocodile caught him by the toe?
Rakan, seeing a monk approach, raised his hair-
duster. The monk made an obeisance. Rakan said,
“What did you make a bow to?” The monk said, “To
you, out of gratitude.” Rakan struck him, and snarled,
“You say you bowed to me when you saw me raise my
hair-duster, why don^ you thank me every day when
you see me sweep the ground or the floor?”
We should say “thank you,” never, or always; not
sometimes. This is the life of Zen, the democracy of
Zen, the modesty of nature.
Ankoku (A n k u o ) 安国， a disciple of Sepp6, continued
Seppo's teaching ways. His dates are unknown. The
anecdotes concerning him are not very interesting, with
the exception of the following, which is so because of
its literary connections. A monk asked Ankoku, “What
is the matter of the tip of a single hair?” Ankoku
raised his surplice. But the monk said, “I beg you to
explain it to m e !’’ Ankoku said, “Do not shed tears
holding the jade to your bosom ! Tomorrow morning
present it once more to the King of S o , 楚！”
“The tip of a single hair” comes from the saying, “At
the top of the tip of one hair the universe is determined,w
一毛頭上安乾坤， meaning that the whole universe rests
on the tip of a hair. In Zen this is to be grasped as
eliminating the idea of large and small, inside and out
side, now and then, this and that. Ankoku raised his
kesa, as transcending both the one hair and the universe.
The monk could not or would attend to this, and asked
for a non-Zen answer, which Ankoku kindly gave him.
What he said refers to a story in the writings of Han-
Kuzan 55
feitzu 韓非子， Book IV, 13, The Difficulty of Pienho. A man

of Chu, called Pienho, found an uncut jade in the Chu
Mountains. He took it home and presented it to the
Emperor Wu. The Emperor asked a jeweller to assess
it. “It is just an ordinary stone,” announced the jewel-
ler. The Emperor, believing Pienho to be a liar, ordered
his left foot to be cut off. When the Emperor Wu
died, and Wen ascended the throne, Pienho again pre
sented it to the Emperor, who also asked a jeweller to
give his opinion of it. Again he said, “Just a stone.”
The Emperor, regarding Pienho as a liar, ordered his
right foot to be cut off. King Wen died, and Chang
became Emperor. Pienho, carrying the jade in his arms,
went to the foot of the So ( 楚， or Ching 荆 ,） Mountains
and wept there for three days and three nights until
all his tears were cried away, and he wept blood. On
hearing this, the Emperor sent officers to find out the
reason, saying, “In this world such people are many;
why are you weeping so bitterly?” Pienho said, “I
am not grieving about the loss of my feet; but because
the jade was called a stone, and because an upright
man was called dishonest. That’s why I am grieving.”
The Emperor told a jeweller to polish the jade, and it
was found out to be so, and was named “The Jade of
Pienho.” Ankoku told the monk not to behave like
Pienho and be passive, but to be himself the tip of a
hair, the universe.
Taigen (T*aiyiian) who preached on the Nirvana
Sutra, was laughed at by a Zen monk for his pains,
but his anecdotes are not interesting or vivid. That is
why, perhaps, his dates are unknown. Kuzan (Kushan)
鼓山， is better, though his dates are also unknown. He
became a priest at the age of fourteen, visited many
masters of Zen and was finally enlightened by Seppo.
When Kuzan went first to Seppo, he had hardly enter
ed the gate when Seppo pushed him over and said,
“What’s this !” and Kuzan was immediately enlightened.
Forgetting himself, he just lifted up his hands and
danced around. Sepp6 said, “Are you behaving ration
56 Seppdfs Disciples I
ally?^ Kuzan said, uWhat has this to do with ra

tionality ?n Seppo stroked his back, and confirmed his
enlightenment.
One day Hofuku (P a o fu ) 保福， a fellow-discipl? with
Kuzan, was talking together with another monk, in the
Tea Hall. Seeing this, Kuzan said, “Don’t weave sub
tleties and complications, 葛藤！” Hofuku said, “We’re not.
We are making Buddhism clearer, see?” Kuzan made
as if to strike him. “Where am I wrong?” asked Hofuku.
Kuzan gave him a blow.
Buddhism, that is, Zen, is not to be talked about,
written about, read about. Each act, each thought, each
emotion is to be “performed” with the whole and un
divided mind-body. That is all. If this is done, we
may talk about Zen.
A monk asked Kuzan, “What is the Great Principle
of Buddhism?” Kuzan answered, “When the golden
crow appears for a moment, there is not a cloud for
ten thousand leagues.”
The golden crow, which has three legs, is the sun.
When the sun just peeps out, the world is changed. But
the sun is not a symbol of Buddhism or enlightenment.
When we really see the sunlight we are enlightened.
When we really understand Buddhism we are en-
sunned.
Chapter VIII
SEPPO^ DISCIPLES II
Another disciple of Seppo, Chokei (Ch^ngch^ng)

長慶， had himself many disciples, fifteen hundred, twenty
six being enlightened under him. He died in 932 aged
seventy nine. When he became enlightened, on rolling
up a screen, he composed a famous verse，偈 .
也大差也大差，捲起簾來見天下，
有人問我解何宗，拈起拂子驀口打。
What a difference ! What a difference !

Raise the blind, and see the world !
If someone asks me to tell him what my religion is
I raise my hossu and strike his mouth.
As noted before, such questions particularly are

anathema. “What do you believe?” indeed ! Like Walt
Whitman, I believe everything and everybody. The
learned in his blindness bows down to theology and
philosophy.
On the whole the anecdotes concerning Chokei are
interestingly short or uninterestingly long. An ex
ample of the former.
A monk asked Ch6kei, “How can we attain to a state
without doubt?” Chokei stretched out his arms.
To believe it because it is true, to believe it because
it is impossible, to believe it for any reason, to believe
it for no reason,—all are wrong. We are to believe, that
is all. Believe any nonsense? No, believe the sense of
the senses (even if they sometimes deceive you), believe
everything that comes before thought. How about if
you see a ghost? Go up and shake it by the hand, or
53 Sepp6fs Disciples 11
kick it on the shins. If you make a mistake? Well,

that，s fun,—I mean fun to the universe, though it may
not be exactly fun to you, at the time.
When we move our body, this is faith. Doubt whether
we can walk or not is physical and spiritual malady.
And belief in the power to move comes before the
movement. Further, if Chokei holds out both hands
to illustrate the state of no doubt, this is not Zen; he
also wishes to illustrate it.
Chokei said to his monks, uIf I expounded the essence
of our religion, you should shut the door of the Hall,
because were the Law completely explained, there
would be no more people.” At that time there was a
monk who said, “I’m not worried about there being no
people, I ask you to explain the Law to the bitter
end V1 Chokei said, uShall I entrust you with the heart
of the matter?”
If everyone were enlightened, there would be no com
mon or garden human beings. All would be Buddhas
or bodhisattvas. Strictly speaking, the impossibility of
this is due to the incompetence of the Zen masters.
The customer is never wrong.
One day Chokei went to the Hall where all the monks
were assembled. He called out one monk and told the
congregation to bow to him. He then said, “What’s so
fine about this monk that I should have you bow to
him?” The monks were silent.
It is said that the Empress Komyo washed a leper,
in order to demonstrate the spirit of the Mahayana.
We might think of this kind of thing as the solution of
the problem of war and all the rest of them down to
matrimonial squabbles, but it is not so. People are
quite capable of bowing down to each other, and then
mowing down each other.
A monk asked, “What is the True Eye of the Law?”
Ch6kei said, “I have a favour to ask of you: don’t throw
sand around !’’
People ask why and how as an excuse for not doing
what they know they should do. In some ways illu
Choke% 59
sion, as Nietzsche said, is life-giving, and we may tell

a lie until it becomes the truth, but such truths are
not fundamental. We have to learn to look with the
eye, and the only way is to keep on looking, looking at
a snake until it ceases to be repulsive, looking at a
naked woman until she ceases to be attractive, and
until snakes and women become supremely interesting.
Chdkei went into the monks’ Hall and showed them
a piece of congratulatory calligraphy, and said to them,
‘*If you see it, you don’t see it; do you see it?” The
monks did not utter a word.
When my little dog keeps on barking round the table
for still more tid-bits, if I am in a good condition,
physically and spiritually, I don’t hear him, but more
or less mechanically give him another bit of cake. If
my condition is not good, I can hear him bark, with
exasperation, and give him another bit of cake con
sciously, and resentfully. Chokei puts the monks on
the spot, however. If they say, “We don’t see it,” he
will laugh at their cunning. If they say, ‘*We see it,”
he will ask, “Is this the ordinary seeing, or the Zen
seeing?” And whichever they choose, he will ask, “What
is the difference between them?”
Jizo, Chokei, and Hofuku, entering their town, went
to see some screens on which peonies were painted.
Hofuku said, “A fine group of peonies !’’ Chokei said,
“Don’t get flowers on the brain !” Jiz6 said, “A pity,
that clump of peonies !”
Hofuku looked at the flowers, and the art with which
they were portrayed, and admired both. Chokei was
afraid Hofuku would be led away by the life of nature
or the rapture of art, and warned him about “flowers
of the eye,” 眼花， that is, about being in a flurry, get
ting hysterical about beauty or goodness or truth;
another term is “flowers of illusion,” 幻華， wandering
thoughts, judgements of value. Jizo then says that
Chokei has spoiled the flowers with his cautionary
remarks, and made them stink of Zen. All three are
right, and Tighter than the peonies themselves, for Christ
is more glorious, as a man, with his toiling to convert
people, and spinning words to do so, than the flowers
that never do either. We have to go through the three
stages: innocently praising the flowers; fearing the
power of their beauty; and regretting the fear, in order
to go back to the flowers themselves, with renewed
courage and enriched innocence.
Ky6sei (Chingching) 鏡清， dates unknown, was a dis
ciple of Sepp6, together with Gensha, Ummon, and so
on, but he seems to have been an over-subtle kind of
teacher. There are many anecdotes concerning him, but
the questions are difficult, the answers more so, and if
we can understand both, neither is interesting.
Ky6sei asked a monk, “Where have you been recent-
ly?” “Three Peaks,” replied the monk. “And where
did you spend the summer seclusion?” “Five Peaks.”
“ I’ll give you thirty strokes !” said Ky6sei. “What did
I do wrong?” asked the monk. “You came from one
temple, and went to another,” said Ky6sei.
“ Three Peaks” and “Five Peaks” are non-existent
places (temples). The monk is not serious. He just
does the round of famous temples and masters without
a violent desire for enlightenment. The Zen master
cannot be deceived as to the degree of zeal of the
learner-monk.
A monk said to Kyosei, UI am pecking inside the shell,
哮； I ask you to peck outside, 琢 Ky6sei said, “Are
you in a state of active readiness, 活， or not?” The
monk said, **If I were not, people would despise me,
恠笑 Kydsei said, “You are still wallowing in the
grass V9
The chick pecking inside the shell, and the mother
hen pecking outside so that the chick should be born,
is an apt symbol of the relation of teacher and pupil,
学人， in regard to the enlightenment of the latter.
Kyosei seems to have been famous for his ability in
this respect. The monk imagined that his enlighten
ment was imminent. Kyosei told him that far from
about to reach the summit he was still in the grasses
Kydsei 61
at the foot of the Mountain of Purgatory. To change

the metaphor, every man, however great, or rather, in
proportion as he is great, stands on the shoulders of
his predecessors. In this respect Zen has an oriental
sameness and monotony, for everyone^ satori is sup
posed to be (more or less) the same, whereas in the
West, as Spengler says, to understand Shakespeare we
must surpass Shakespeare. When Kyosei^ master,
Ummon, was asked, “What is this pecking within and
without?” he answered with one of his famous laconisms,
“Echo•”
Ky6sei asked a monk where he had come from. “From
Shakky6,,> he said. <4How is your Self?'* asked Kyosei.
“I have left Shakky6,” he said. “Don’t I know you’re
not at Shakkyo? I’m asking about your S e lf!” said
Kyosei. The monk said, “Why don’t you accept what
I say?” Kyosei struck him. The monk said， “I have
something more to say.” Kydsei said, “I’ll just beat
you ! Your words must be done !”
Speech is not silver, and silence is not golden. Speech
and silence may be gold, silver, or lead. Speech, when
it is the whole activity, is better than action, and far
superior to any kind of silence.
A monk said to Ky6sei, “What is the meaning of ‘The
Bhagavat in the ten directions is one road to Nirvana’？ ”
Kydsei said, “In a house, there are not two masters.”
The ten directions are the eight points of the compass
and the nadir and the zenith, meaning the whole
universe. Bhagavat, or Bhagavan is an epithet of the
Buddha, meaning “ excellent.” The Buddhistic meaning
of the phrase, which comes in the Surangama Sutra,
愣厳経， chapter five, is that salvation is possible in every
place. Kyosei^ answer gives the complementary truth,
that reality is a unity. On the one hand, every sound is
the voice of the Law; on the other, only Bach’s music
is the voice of God. Both statements are equally and
instantaneously true.
Hofuku (P a o fu ) 保福， another of Seppd’s disciples,
died in 928. At the age of fifteen he was already with
62 Seppd*s Disciples II
Seppo. Soon after, he visited the famous masters of
China, but came back to Seppo. A temple was built
for him, and he could not decline the mastership. His
disciples were never less than seven hundred. The
anecdotes show him to have been a lively and original
character.
He said one day to his monks, “The supreme thing is
like the spark from a struck flint, a flash of lightning;
whether you grasp it or not, you cannot avoid becom
ing a corpse and losing your life.,> A certain monk
asked, “If a man really grasps it, will he also lose his
life, or not?” Hofuku said, “Leaving aside the previous
question, have you yourself grasped it, or not?” The
monk answered, “If I hadn’t grasped it, how could I
avoid being laughed at by everybody?” Hofuku said,
“Bright fe llo w ! Bright fellow !” The monk said,
“What’s the idea?” Hofuku said, “You’ve had a dip
perful of urine thrown in your face, and yet you don’t
know it stinks !’’
The important thing in Zen, as in humour, and love
(at first sight) and poetry (intuition), is speed. If we
can always be quicker than (any foolish) thought or
emotion, this is to be always in Paradise. Hofuku, to
prevent dichotomous thinking, says that whatever you
do, however fast or slow you may be, it^ no good any
way; death and Hell are your portion. The monk then
asks, “How about an enlightened man?” Hofuku will
not deal with hypothetical cases, and asks, “How about
you; are you enlightened or not?>, The monk answers
facetiously, but expresses his actual feeling in the mat
ter; his answer has some Zen, that is, some humour in
it, and Hofuku praises him for it. However, when the
monk asks him whether he is praising or blaming him,
Hofuku says, “Blaming, of course, you conceited
booby V9
Hofuku asked a monk, ‘Where have you come from?”
“From Ky6sei,” he replied. “And what did you learn
there?” asked Hofuku. “I got n oth in g, 拈不出，” said
the monk. “How did you manage to do that?” said
Hofuku 63
Hofuku. The monk made no answer.

To desire nothing, physico-spiritually, to get nothing,
to give nothing, this, as Eckhart says, is the true poverty
of “Blessed are the poor.” But what a world of dif
ference there is between nothing and Nothing !
Hofuku asked a monk, “What is your name?”
“Hsientsd,歴沉，Everywhere-swampy,” he replied. Ho
fuku said, uIf you happen to run across a Mr. Dried-
up-place, 枯洞， what would you do?” “Who is this Mr.
Dried-up-place?” asked the monk. “I’m that man said
Hofuku. The monk said, “Master, you should not make
a fool of people!’’ Hofuku said, “It’s you rather who
are making of fool of me Vf
The monk, like everyone else, wanted to become rich.
Hofuku used the monk’s name to point out to him that
he, Hofuku, was as poor as a church mouse, spiritually.
The monk thought that Hofuku could not be serious.
When Bernard Shaw said a rich man was a thief, the
rich man thought he was joking.
Hofuku said, “There is a man now passing behind the
Buddha Hall, and he knows this is Tom, this is Dick,
or this is Harry. There is a man passing before the
Buddha Hall. Somehow or other he sees nothing and
nobody. Tell me, where is the profit and loss of Bud
dhism?^ A monk said, “It is because he distinguishes
things badly he can’t see.” Hofuku said, “Kwatz!” Then,
himself answering, he said, “If this is the Buddha Hall
he can’t see.” The monk said, “If it wasn’t the Buddha
Hall, he could see all righ t!’’ Hofuku said, “It is just
because of the Buddha Hall that he can see anything.”
“Behind the Buddha Hall” means in the vulgar, com
monplace, unpoetical, irreligious world, where we meet
all kinds of people. ( ieW e descend to meet，” says
Emerson.) “Passing before the Buddha Hall” is the
world of Blake and Eckhart, Hanshan and Thoreau, the
world of Shakespeare, in which everything is equal, is
equally interesting, is infinitely interesting, so that we,
so to speak, see nothing, see no particular thing as
desirable or unwanted. “Passing before the Buddha
64 Seppo^ Disciples II
Hall” is the profit of Buddhism. The monk is terribly

matter-of-fact, and thinks only about seeing physical
objects, not realising that all things are physico-
spiritual. He admits, superstitiously, that there may be
something special about the Buddha Hall, but says see
ing is better than not seeing, discriminating is better
than any universality. Hofuku ends, somewhat hope
lessly, by saying that the Buddha Hall is not anything
special. It is because all things have the Buddha nature
that all the multifarious differences arise. Variety
must have sameness at the back of it, otherwise it could
not exist.
Hofuku, seeing a monk, struck the (round) outside
post of the temple; he then struck the head of the monk,
who cried out with pain. Hofuku said, “Why doesn’t
the post feel pain?” The monk gave no answer.
The answer is; “The question is the same as, ‘Have
you stopped beating your wife?’ ” In other words, the
answer to the question why the post doesn’t feel pain,
is, “ It does.” “Why doesn’t it cry out, then?” “It
does.” “Why don’t I hear it?’’ “You do, but you don’t
know you do.” “Why don’t I know?” “Because you are
not enlightened.” ‘"Why am I not enlightened?” “Be-
cause you are too damn lazy !” ‘*Why.
A monk asked Hofuku^ “How can we enter the fire
and not be burned, enter the water and not be drown
ed?” Hofuku said, “If it were water-fire, would you be
burned-drowned?”
This ingenious answer means that we are scorched to
death, or drowned to death, because we distinguish fire
and water. We die because we distinguish life and
death.
When Hofuku was about to die he said to his monks,
“For the $ast ten days my vitality has decreased. It is
nothing; simply the time has come.” A monk said, “The
time has come for you to die,—is that all right? To
continue living，一 is that all rig h t, 是？ ” Hofuku an-
swered, “It is the W a y , 道 •” The monk asked, “How can
I stop being flustered?” Hofuku said, “ It never rains
Tosu 65
but it pours.’’1 With this, he sat in the zazen style and

passed away.
“All right,” 是， comes from 垦， which means that
the s u n , 日， is accurate, 正， (in its revolution). The
Way means, not fate, or the normal course for all human
beings, but the Buddha nature, reality, absolute truth.
By “ One misfortune follows another,” Hofuku means
that all our life we are afraid to die, and then, in the
end, we have to die.
Tosu (T*outsu), mentioned on page 43 as visited by
Seppo, went one day to the house of a danapati,
in the capital, invited to dinner there. The danapati
brought a tray of grass and set it before him. Tosu
put both fists on his head. The danapati thereupon
brought in the meal. Afterwards, a monk asked him
the meaning of this. T6su said, “Kannon Bosatsu.”
The offering of grass to Tosu suggested that he was
an ox, and he cheerfully admitted it. It is said that
an unenlightened priest will be reborn as an ox. The
Buddha is called “the king of bulls,” 牛王， in reference
perhaps to his name Gautama (go, gaus, a bull). In
the ox-herding pictures, the ox is used to mean the
monk looking for reality, controlling himself, the ox.
In any case, Tosu showed the danapati, a family-patron
of Buddhism, that he had no dignity, that he admitted
being an ox in some respects, though not in all. Kan-
non is well known as taking an infinite variety of forms,
a bird, a vase, a willow-branch, a pearl, and so on.
1. The Chinese metaphor i s , 失銭遭罪， “ To lose money is a

crime.” In Tang times a man was fined for losing money. The
Japanese say, UA bee stings a weeping face/*
Chapter IX
HOGEN
H6gen (F a y e n ) 法眼， the founder of the branch of

Zen that bears his name, was bom in 885. He became
a priest at the age of seven, studied Buddhism and
Confucianism, and was good at writing. One day, on
his way to the lakes, he was caught by a shower, and
sheltered from it in Jizd’s temple. The master of the
temple, Keichin1，桂深， who was sitting by the fire
place, asked him, “Where are you going?” He replied,
“Just on an angya1 2, slanting about.” <4What is angyaV'
said Keichin. “ I don’t know,” said H6gen. “Don’t-know
is the most intimate,” said Keichin. They sat down by
the fire talking of Joron (Chaolun)3, and when they got
to “Heaven and I are of the same Root,” and Jiz64 asked,
“Are mountains and rivers and the great earth different
from me, or the same?” Shinzan (Chinshan) 進山， who
was with them, said, “The same•” Jizo held up two
fingers, and, looking at them earnestly, said there were
two, and then went out. It had now cleared up out
side, and Jizo accompanied them to the gate. On the
way, in the garden there was a stone, and pointing to
it Jizo asked a question. “It is said that in the three
worlds all is mind; is this stone in the mind, or outside
it?” H6gen answered, “Inside it.” Jiz6 said, “You
people on a pilgrimage (angya)f why do you think that
the stone is in your minds?” Hogen was at a loss and
1. This is Rakan, that is, Jizo.

2. The wandering o f a Zen monk from master to master in search
of enlightenment.
3. A treatise on Buddhism, by the 4th century Sengchao.
4. That is, Keichin ， Rakan.
Echo 67
could find no answer. So he undid his bundle, and
asked Jizo to help him resolve the problem. After a
month, he explained his view of the philosophy of
Buddhism, but Jiz6 said, “Buddhism is not philosophy.”
Hogen then said, UI have now got to the point of eschew
ing all words and giving up all philosophy.>, Jizo said,
“If you now explain Buddhism, everything is accom
plished•” At this, Hogen was profoundly enlightened.
Buddhism, that is, Zen, is not philosophy, but it is not
no-philosophy. When we know that silence is golden,
then we must speak, and our speech will be super-
golden. H6gen’s enlightenment was like that of the
Sixth Patriarch, intellectual in nature, perhaps because
they were both gentle and mild, not passionate or
ambitious.
Later, Hogen took over a temple at Rinsen, and it is
said that those who gathered around him were more
than ten thousand. His school was most prosperous
and his disciples never less than five hundred. In 958
he became ill, and died at the age of fifty four. The
disciples who became enlightened numbered forty three.
Besides a collection of his sayings, he is remembered
for his JwJcfciron,十規論 .
A monk Ech6 (H uichao) 惠超， asked H6gen, “What is
the Buddha?” H6gen said, “You are Ech6 !” The monk
came to a realisation.
Suppose Hogen had said, “You are the Buddha!’’
This would be as true as any other statement, according
to the meaning. The question is, who and what are
“you” ，and, who and what is the Buddha? Hogen must
adapt himself to the monk’s (proleptic) experience of
himself, another Buddha, and says, “You are Echd !’’
“You” meant the Buddha, and “Ech6” meant the Bud
dha, to Ech6 at that moment.
Hakuyd (P aiyan g) 白楊， was asked by H6gen “Where
is the dwelling place of the Buddha?” Haktiyo an
swered, <4No fixed place.^ Hogen objected, 4<If this is
the absolute Buddha, how can it be not fixed, no special
place?” Hakuy6 said, “If it were in a special place, it
68 Hogen
would not be the Absolute Buddha•” H6gen agreed.
“The heathen in his blindness bows down to wood
and stone,” but in Christianity and Buddhism and Zen
also, there are sacred places, and holy books, and bow
ings and ceremonies and rules and regulations. It is
true that some places are more equal than others, but
all places are equal,—that is what is difficult to grasp.
In the it is written, “If you see all forms
as no-forms, you see the Tathagata.” Hogen said, uIf
you see all forms as no-forms, you cannot see the
Tathagata.”
The Tathagata is the suchness of things, all things as
they really are. Hogen is right, and the sutra is wrong.
A thing is a no-thing but it is also a thing. Forms are
no-forms, but also forms. Everything is the same, but
everything is different. That is the marvel of our life,
the supreme problem of philosophy, and the love of this
contradiction makes the world go round. Hogen him
self however, sometimes states the oneness, the same
ness of things, for example in a poem,
Gazing at a mountain, it is not a mountain;

Gazing at the waters, why should we separate them
from other things?
Mountains and great waters, and the whole earth,
These are all the one wheel of the moon.
A monk asked Hogen, **What is e t e r n i t y ? “It is at

this very moment,” he replied.
This is too direct, too philosophical for Zen, for truth.
When it is so stated we must deny it, and say that time
can exist, meaninglessly, without eternity, and eternity,
meaninglessly without time. Time is eternity only if
you make it so.
One day Hogen pointed to some bamboos, and said to
a monk, “Do you see them?” “I see them,” replied the
monk. aDo they come to the eye, or does the eye go
to them?” asked H6gen. “I have no idea at all,” said
the monk. Hogen gave up, and went away.
The real point is not in whether beauty is in the
Sogen 69
object or in the eye of the beholder. It is in whether

you really behold or not, and no amount of philosophy
will make a man really see bamboos i f h e d o e s n ’t.
There is a significant gap between the poetical view of
bamboos and the Zen view. The Zen seeing of bamboos
is dependent upon self-lessness and bamboo-lessness.
The self and the bamboos are the same. The poetical
view depends upon whether you see into the “life” of
the bamboos or not, in other words, it depends upon
what sort of a self you have. According to Buddhism
(and Zen follows it) all selves are the same, but this
is not true in fact, only in theory, with the result that
a poet, that is, a poet like Wordsworth, or better still,
Clare, will see bamboos that Zen cannot reveal. Whether
H6gen could see the bamboos “really,’7that is，poetically,
whether he could listen to Bach musically and weep
emotionless tears,—that is a question. In any case
Hogen^ method of Zen teaching here is at fault.
A monk asked Hogen, uWhat is a drop of water from
S6gen (Ts‘aoyiian) 曹源？ ’’ H6gen answered “It is a drop
of water from Sogen !,? Once Sho (Shao) IS , the Na
tional Teacher, heard this saying, and was suddenly
enlightened.
Sogen is Sokei, the place where the Sixth Patriarch
taught. The drop of water is the truth revealed to
and by him. Hogen was a master of this repetition of
the question so as to be a perfect answer to it. For
Hogen, the question was answered in the asking of it.
Doubt and belief were one, not two things, and deep.
The danger here lies in the very transcendence, which
begins in the use of water as a symbol. The question
is the answer, and the answer is the question, that is
true, but more important still is that Christ is a door,
and a door (if you go through it properly) is Christ.
The next anecdote is better.
H6gen asked H6shi C h6r6, 宝資長老， “An ancient man
said that the Light passes everywhere through moun
tains and rivers, without obstruction. What is this Light
which penetrates into every place?” H6shi replied, “ It
70 Hogen
is the voice of fulling the damask cloth among the
eastern rice-fields.”
The “ancient man” is a monk, Chdsetsu,張拙，who
asked Sekiso concerning this saying. This again comes
in the 39th Case of the Mumonkan, where Ummon in
terrupts a monk, quoting this saying, and asks, uls not
this by the genius Ch6setsu?” The thusness of things
pervades the universe, like light, like the sun that
shines upon the just and upon the unjust. Give me
another example, says Hogen. Hoshi answers in the
Chinese poetical style. The sound of the fulling block
on an autumn evening heard from some distance away,
—this is that sound that ensoundeneth every man that
cometh into the world.
Once Hogen was teaching the monks before the morn
ing meal. He pointed to the bamboo blinds. Two
monks came out and rolled them up. “One wins, the
other loses !” was his comment.
Comparisons are odious, but odiousness is one of the
qualities—almost the chief quality—of the universe.
Zen means not choosing, not praising or blaming, not
liking or loathing,—so they say. But real Zen means
choosing, praising, blaming, liking, loathing,—humorous
ly. One wins, and rejoices, another loses and weeps.
We, as Paul says, rejoice with him that rejoices, and
weep with him that weeps; but don’t take either too
seriously.
A monk said to H6gen, “There is a saying, ‘One lamp
destroys a room’s hundred year’s darkness’ ；what is this
light?^ Hogen exclaimed, 4<What the devil are you wor
rying about a hundred years for?''
Each ray of light destroys a whole world of darkness,
but there is no need to get sentimental about the time
(or even the place). In this sense Zen belongs to haiku,
not to waka, to the present moment, not to the past.
H6gen asked the chief monk Kaku (C h ia o ) 覚， “Did
you come by boat, or on land?” “By boat,” he replied.
“Where’s the boat?” H6gen asked. “On the river,”
said Gaku, and went off. Hogen said to the monks near
Kaku 71
him, “Tell me, that monk just now, has he eyes, or is
he eyeless?”
This anecdote forms the 51st Case of the Shoyoroku.
The question “Where have you come from,” or as here,
“How did you come?” was a common form of examina-
tion of the attainment of monks. There are three pos
sible answers: first, to answer in a simple way; second,
to answer transcendentally; third, to answer simply.
Kaku answered evidently in the third way, (“evidently,”
because he went off without further ado, having passed,
not H6gen’s, but his own examination). Hogen then
examines the monks, whose reply is not given, but we
are left to imagine that they failed, in not realising that
Kaku’s was a Zen reply. If Hogen asked me, what
should I say? To say yes would be feeble, and to say
no would be just playing the fool. To try to think of
something brilliant would be contemptible. The best
thing would be to say, ^Hogen, you and Kaku are a
pair of angels.”
A similar anecdote is the following. Hogen asked a
monk where he had come from. He answered, “I have
come here after paying my respects to great sages in
ShishiL” H6gen said, “Have the great sages come out
of their stupas this year?” “They have come out,” re
plied the monk. H6gen asked another monk, “Tell me,
has this monk been to ShisM?”
The unequivocal reply of the monk to H6gen’s ironical
question shows that he had been to Shinshu, that is to
say, he had seen greatness there in the form of Zen
masters.
Hogen said to the master Shuzan (H siushan) 脩山，
“A hair’s breadth of difference, and they are Heaven
and Earth apart. What do you think of this?” Shuzan
said, “A hair’s breadth of difference, and they are Heaven
and Earth apart.” H6gen said, “What’s the use of talk
ing like that?” Shuzan said, ‘‘That’s all I can say; how
about you?” H6gen said, “A hair’s breadth of dif
ference, and they are Heaven and Earth apart.” Shuzan
made obeisance to him.
72 Hogen
Hogen^ quotation is from the ShinjinmeL5 It means

that the greatest music, played just a little out of tune
or out of time is as bad as, or even worse than,
cacophony. It means that people are either good or bad,
actions are either perfect or imperfect; there is nothing
between. You have good taste or bad taste. There are
no middle-brows. The slightest touch of egoism, senti
mentality, cruelty, snobbery, vulgarity (all the same
thing) and everything done is spoiled. The state of Zen
does not, of course, cover all these cases, and an ên-
lightened” man may be spoiled by his native and
ineradicable insensitivity or stupidity. Shuzan was the
spiritual son of Jizo; he comes, together with Jizo, in
the 12th Case of the Shoyoroku. Hogen was famous for
his repetition, and Shuzan tried it on Hogen himself, but
without effect. What is important is the repetition, and
what is repeated; one is nothing without the other.
Further, just as only God can be worshipped, so re
petition of infinity and eternity is the only real repeti
tion. “Vain repetitions, such as the heathen use,” like
namuamidabutsu, are mere self-hypnosis. Not to repeat
is against all the order of nature, and of art.
A non-Buddhist presented Hogen with a screen with
a picture painted on it. When he had finished looking
at it, H6gen said, “Did you paint this with your hand
or your mind?” The artist answered, “With my mind.”
H6gen said, “What is this mind of yours?” The artist
had no answer.
This seems rather bad manners on the part of Hogen.
The artist should have asked Hogen to paint a picture
with his no-hand, his no-mind, or his hand-mind.
A monk asked Hogen, ''How about when a prodigal
son returns home?” Hogen said, uWhat will you offer
him?” The monk answered, “I have nothing.” H6gen
said, “How about his daily necessities?”
The interesting point here is the alternation of prac
tical and idealistic. The monk，s question is, one may
5. See Vol. I, page 100.
Goku 73
suppose, a transcendental one. All human beings are
prodigal sons who have fallen into sophistication and
vulgarity. H6gen says, “How will you receive this one
who is as if arisen from the dead?” The monk says,
piously, U1 have no desires, no possessions, no theories,
no moral principles.” Hogen says, uMan doth not live
by Zen (that is, ‘Every word that proceedeth out of
the mouth of God’ ） alone.”
One day Hogen told a monk to fetch some earth to
add to that in a lotus-pot. He asked him, “Did you get
the earth from the East of the bridge, or the West of
the bridge?” “From the East of the bridge,” r 印 lied the
monk. Hogen asked, (tls this the truth, or is it delu-
sion?”
We are not told the monk’s answer. How shall we
answer it ourselves. Is the world real, or unreal? The
answer is Yes. Is there such a thing as East and West
in finite space? You know only if you have been in
infinite space, which does not mean in a space-rocket.
Earth is very real, especially when you get a little
bit in your eye. But Hamlet speaks of “the mind’s eye.”
Does not the mind create the eye and the earth in it?
“Nothing is but thinking makes it so.” Wordsworth’s
“imagination” solves the question, for it is the power to
create what already exists.
One day, Hogen was by the fire, and, lifting up an
incense spoon said to GokQ，（ Wuk‘u n g ) 悟空，“Don’t call
this an incense spoon; what will you call it?” Goku
said, “An incense spoon.” Hogen rejected his answer.
It look Goku more than twenty days to grasp why.
This kind of problem, “Don’t call it a — ; what do
you call it?” is to me the most difficult of all. Goku,
was once asked by a monk, “What is the O rigin, 本源，
of all the Buddhas?” He answered, <fWhat is it you are
calling ‘all the Buddhas’？ ”
A monk said to Hogen, uThe community of monks
sells a dead monk’s clothes; who sells those of a
Patriarch?” Hogen said, 4<What clothes of a dead monk
did you know sold?”
74 Hogen
The monk’s question seems rather democratic. The
Zen Sect is and always has been feudalistic. Hogen
avoids the question by bullying the monk. He suddenly
transcendentalises everything, and says, what is not at
all true, that the idea of the difference in rank and
status of a monk and a patriarch is of no importance
for salvation.
C h a p te r X
HOGEN’S DISCIPLES
The style of the Hogen Sect was said to be like fight

ing with sharp swords; the meaning of the words fitted
exactly the meaning of the experiences. The method
of teaching was not so stern and strict as that of the
Rinzai Sect. They taught slowly, as if treating in
valids, and when the final stage was reached, the coup
de grace was delivered cleverly. Engo said of this sect,
“Hearing the sound, they understood the way. Seeing
the form they clarified the mind. A sharp point is hid
den in their verses, and there is an echo in the sound
of the words.”
Of the Hogen Sect, besides the founder, the two most
famous members were Tendai and Eimyo. Tendai
Tokushd CT‘ient‘ai T会sh a o ) 天合徳韶， was enlightened by
Hogen. Later he went to Mount Tendai, from which he
got his name. He became the teacher of the Emperor
Chui, and die in 972 at the age of eighty two. His chief
disciple was Eimy6 (Y u n g m in g ) 永明， whose disciples
were said to be always more than two thousand. He
read and wrote an enormous quantity of books, and
was also favoured by the Emperor. Priests came from
Korea to learn from him. He died in 975 at the age
of seventy two.
For a time the Sect of Hogen was thus very
prosperous, but soon fell into decay. The apparent
reason for this is a very interesting one. The Hogen
Sect was not pure Zen, but mixed with the Nembutsu.
They studied also the Hokke, Kegon, Shuryogon, and
Engaku Sutras. They wished, particularly Tendai, to
be wide and inclusive. It is narrowness, however, that
76 Hogen's Disciples
ensures the permanence of sects and doctrines. The
reason for this is that human nature can be deep, but
if it is wide it is always shallow, in the sense that there
must be a dispersion of energy. Dispersion is decay.
Ummon’s Zen is a sort of electric spark, and not
suitable to the slow-but-sure, plodding kind of monk.
Famous for his “ gate of one letter,” 一字關， not many
monks passed through it, if we take the anecdotes as
evidence. When for example Ummon was asked about
the sword that cuts a hair dropped on it, that is, Zen,
he answered “Tsu !，，稱，which is said1 to be the sound
of a knife cutting into flesh. This does not “mean，，
something. It is the state of mind of Ummon, which
he wants to communicate to the monk, the sensitivity
to the danger and pain of life, a sensitivity which Zen
should not dull. Another example was when Ummon
was asked, “What is the True Dharma，Eye?” Ummon
answered, “Universal !’，普，which does not mean, as in
Buddhism, that the Buddha-eye penetrates all things,
but that the Buddha eye is everywhere, seeing itself.
When asked, “What is the Way?” he answered “Go
aw ay!’’ 去，which means, “Go and walk on i t ! Don’t
stand there asking questions about i t !’’
Tendai(T‘ient‘a i) 天合， 891-972, became a priest at the
age of fifteen. It is said that he visited fifty six masters,
and at last came to Hogen, and became enlightened. He
was favoured by the Emperor, and was instrumental
in bringing back to China, from Korea, books that had
been scattered under the persecutions of Buddhism at
the end of the Tang Dynasty. His enlightened disciples
were said to be forty nine, among whom Eimyo
Enju was the greatest. A verse by Tendai:
The peak of Tunghsuan

Is not a human being;
Outside the mind, not a thing exists;
1. The dictionary gives “ rotten meat,” which would be an abusive

appreciation of the sword.
Eirnyo 77
The green mountains fill the eye.
The first two lines are too positive, and the third may
be changed to “Inside the mind also not a thing exists.”
The anecdotes concerning Tendai are not very interest
ing.
Eimyd (Yungm ing) 永明，904-975, was a Buddhist from
his childhood, but entered the priesthood at the age of
twenty eight. He became the disciple of Suigan, but was
enlightened by Tendai. After he became master of the
big temple of Eimyo, his disciples always numbered
more than two thousand. He read and wrote much, and
studied also the Nembutsu Sect.
A monk said to Eimyo, UI have been with you a long
time, but I have yet to grasp your way of looking at
things.” Eimy6 said, “Understand that you don’t under-
stand l" The monk said, “ If I don’t understand, how
can I understand anything?” Eimyo replied, “ The
womb of a cow gives birth to an elephant, and the blue
sea produces yellow dust.”
Eimy6’s intention is clearly to make the ununder
standing monk understand less. When we feel an ex
hilaration in the non-understanding we are close to Zen.
Eimyo was asked by a monk, “What is the Great
Round Mirror?” Eimyo answered, UA broken crock/*
This comes from the phrase, “Within the bright mir
ror there is not a hair’s breadth of difference,” 大円鏡
裏不隔糸毫， that is, in the Buddhist wisdom there is not
the slightest separation between this and that, mine and
yours. Thus the monk’s question is, “What is the
essence of Buddhism?” or, “What is Zen?” The answer
is not as destructive and nihilistic as it looks. Oscar
Wilde said that art was useless, but he also thought it
to be the greatest thing, the only thing, in the world.
Of Rakan (Lohan), Shunin, (Shoujen) 守仁， who was
the disciple of Hogen (not the Rakan who was the dis
ciple of Gensha) nothing seems to be known. He was
asked by a monk, ‘^What is the meaning of Daruma’s
coming from the West?” Rakan said, “What do you
78 Hdgen9s Disciples
mean by ‘the meaning of Daruma’s coming from the
West，？，， The monk said, “Has ‘Daruma’s coming from
the West， no meaning?” Rakan said, “You are just
talking with your mouth.”
Chapter XI
YA K U SA N TO SEKISO
Yakusan (Y iie h s h a n )薬山，becam e a p rie s t a t th e age

o f seventeen; he was e n lig h te n e d u n d e r S e kito . H is
disciples w ere m any, and h is school was prosperous. H e
died in 834 A .D . a t th e age o f e ig h ty fo u r. One o f th e
b e st-kn o w n anecdotes (a lth o u g h in one source i t is
a ttrib u te d to Baso,) is th e fo llo w in g .
Yakusan asked a m onk, “ W here have yo u come
fro m ? ” “ F ro m th e S o u th e rn L a k e ,” re p lie d th e m onk,
“ Has th e la k e o ve rflo w e d its banks?” asked Y akusan.
“ N o t y e t,” answ ered th e m on k. T hen Y akusan said,
“ So m uch ra in , and th e la k e n o t y e t fu ll? ” B u t th e
m onk was s ile n t.
T his s to ry has a k in d o f stage iro n y , tw o people ta lk
in g a t cross-purposes. Y akusan is n o t in te re ste d in
the ra in and th e lake , b u t in th e m on k. T he m on k is
in te re ste d in th e ra in and th e la ke , b u t n o t in Y akusan.
In a sense, b o th are w ro n g , th e m on k fo r h is o v e r-
s im p lic ity , and Y akusan fo r o v e r-p ro fu n d ity , and n o t
jo ltin g th e m on k o u t o f h is m e te o ro lo g ic a l com placency.
A m o rik asked Y akusan, “ D id th e essence o f B u dd h ism
e xist b e fo re D arum a cam e?” “ I t d i d , ” s a id Y a k u s a n .
“ Then w h y d id he come, i f i t a lre a d y e xisted ? ” “ H e
came,” said Y akusan, “ ju s t because i t was h ere a lre a d y .”
T his A lic e in W o n de rla nd co n ve rsa tio n is a re m a rk
able escape fro m th e s c ie n tific w o rld o f cause and e ffect.
F ive ce n tu rie s b e fo re D arum a came to C hina, C h ris t
had died to save sinn ers w ho w e re a lre a d y saved b y
the e te rn a l lo v e o f God.
A n o th e r s to ry illu s tra tin g Y a kusa n ’s w it and energy.
Yakusan had n o t ascended th e ro s tru m fo r q u ite a lo n g
80 Yakusan to Sekiso
tim e , and one day th e s u p e rio r came and said, “ The
co ngregation o f m onks are th in k in g abo ut y o u r pre ach
in g a serm on.” Y akusan said, “ R in g th e b e ll!” The
su p e rio r banged aw ay a t th e b e ll, and th e m onks a ll
gathered. B u t Y akusan w e n t back to h is o w n room .
The su p e rio r fo llo w e d h im , and said, “ T he M aster was
going to g ive a ta lk , and th e m onks are a ll rea dy, w h y
d id n ’t yo u say a n y th in g to th em ? ” Y akusan said,
“ T he re are s u tra p rie sts fo r th e sutras, sastra priests
fo r th e sastras; w h y do yo u que stion m y goings-on?”
People teach w h a t th e y can. People teach w h a t th ey
teach. E ve ryb o d y teaches e ve ryb o d y else. O u r teach
in g is n o t h o w e ve r w h a t w e o ste n sib ly teach. H itle r
ta u g h t th e w o rld th a t a m an m ay be to ta lly la c k in g in
h u m a n ity and y e t be g reat. M an y le c tu re rs on p o e try
teach us th a t p o e try is devo id o f va lu e . K re is le r
ta u g h t us th a t v io lin -p la y in g is a m ix tu re o f se n ti
m e n ta lity and acrobatics. Y akusan ta u g h t the m onks
n o t to ask to be ta u g h t. B uddha had a lre a d y ta u g h t
th is , b u t in e ffic ie n tly . T he o n ly w a y to teach n o t teach
in g is re a lly n o t to teach.
Y akusan lea rn e d th is k in d o f th in g fro m S e kito. One
day, Y akusan was d o in g zazen. S e kit6 asked h im , “ W hat
are yo u d oing ? ” “ N o t a th in g ,” re p lie d Yakusan.
“ A re n ’t yo u s ittin g b la n k ly ? ” said S e kit6. “ I f I w ere
s ittin g b la n k ly , I w o u ld be d o in g so m e thin g,” re to rte d
Y akusan. S e kito said, MT e ll m e, w h a t is th a t yo u are
n o t doing?” Y akusan re p lie d UA thousand sag^s could
n o t answ er th a t q u e stio n .”
Y a ku sa n ^ answ er to h is o ld teacher was th e p roper
one. H e said, <4I am le ttin g th e u n ive rse do w h a t it
w ants to do.” S e kitd p ersisted , “ Is n ，
t ‘le ttin g ，doing
som ething?” “ I t is n o t,” said Y akusan. S e k ito said,
“ T e ll me, w h a t is th is ‘le ttin g ? ” ， “ I t can，
t be spoken
about, o r acted a bo ut; th e essence o f greatness is not
to ta lk about i t o r act about i t .，，
Y akusan was asked b y G o ve rn o r R i ( L i) “ W hat are
S ila ，D hyana, and P ra jn a ? ” Y akusan answ ered, “ This
Ungan 81
poor m on k has n o t such useless fu rn itu re .” R i said,

“ D on’t be so m yste rio u s !， ’ Y a kusa n said, “ I f y o u w a n t
to have w h a t I have, y o u m u st s it on th e h ig h e s t m o u n
ta in , go dow n to th e b o tto m o f th e deepest sea. Y o u
don’t th ro w o ff y o u r burde ns even w h e n y o u go to bed;
yo u are busy w ith illu s io n s , 渗漏
S ila is th e precepts, D hya na m e d ita tio n , P ra jn a w is
dom . The G o ve rn o r o f a S ta te m u st be answ ered ru d e ly ,
e spe cia lly w he n he asks a bo ut Zen (w h ic h he w o n ’t.)
H is g re a t fa u lt is la c k o f tru e a m b itio n , and he needs
encouragem ent and s tim u la tio n , th o u g h u n a v a ilin g .
Y akusan’s m a n n e r o f d eath was o f a piece w ith h is
life . W hen he w as a bo ut to die, he y e lle d o u t, uThe
H a ll’s fa llin g dow n ! T he H a ll’s fa llin g dow n !” T he
m onks b ro u g h t v a rio u s th in g s and began to p ro p i t up.
Y akusan th re w up h is hands and said, “ N one o f yo u
understood w h a t I m e a n t!” and d ie d.
W h a t d id Y akusan m ean? E v e ry th in g is fa llin g
dow n; e v e ry th in g is ris in g up. To p ro p w h a t m u st fa ll
is fo o lis h ; ra th e r, g ive i t a push. W hen some fam ous
w o rk o f a rt o r m on um en t o f c u ltu re is d estroyed, w hen
a m o th is b u rn t in a fla m e ，w he n fiv e m illio n Jew s are
slaughtered, le t us do w h a t Y a kusa n d id ,— y e ll, and die.
U ngan ( Y iin y e n ) 雲巖，w ho d ie d in 841, was th e d is
c ip le o f H y a k u j 6 fo r tw e n ty years, b u t g o t e n lig h te n e d
under Y akusan. A m o ng h is d iscip le s w e re Tozan and
Sozan, w ho fo u n d e d th e Soto B ra n ch o f th e Zen Sect.
C o m p a ra tiv e ly fe w anecdotes are to ld a bo ut U ngan,
and th is suggests some la c k o f b rillia n c e in h is Zen,
th a t is, in h im .
One d ay U ngan w as i l l and D 6go (T a o w u )道吾，asked
h im a q u e stio n : “ W hen yo u a re separated fro m y o u r
bag-o’-bones, w h e re can I m eet yo u again?” U ngan
re p lie d , “ W here th e re is no b irth , no d y in g .” D6go said,
“ D on’t say th a t! Say, w h e re th e re is n o t a ny no b ir th
and no d y in g , and w e d on ’t d esire to m eet each o th e r
again.”
U ngan’s answ er was too re lig io u s , D 6go’s too tra n s
82 Yakusan to Sekisd
cendental. C e rta in ly Zen is fo r illn e s s as w e ll as fo r

h e a lth , th o u g h w e are n o t to ld o f any m o n k w ho be
came e n lig h te n e d on a sic k -b e d , b u t D 6go w as c le a rly
too officious. G iv in g som eone a Zen e x a m in a tio n w hen
he feels p o o rly , and te llin g h im he has fa ile d in i t is
n o t e x a c tly a s a lu ta ry and h e a lth -g iv in g p ro ced ure. Zen
m ust be a t one and th e same tim e su p e r-h u m a n and
in fra -h u m a n . A s to th e que stion o f life a fte r death,
those m onks w ho b e lie v e in re in c a rn a tio n have no
p ro b le m ; those w ho d o n ^, ta k e th e co n ve n ie n t a t
titu d e th a t b ir th is death and m e e tin g is p a rtin g and
escape th e d iffic u lty b y tra n s c e n d e n ta lis in g it. I th in k
th e tru e Zen a ttitu d e is th a t o f M rs. G am p. W e are
b o rn in a va le , and m ust ta ke th e (p a in fu l) consequences
o f such a s itu a tio n .
D6go was asked b y a m onk, “ W h a t is th e deepest?”
Dogo cam e d ow n fro m h is seat, m ade obeisance in the
m an ne r o f w o m e n ,女人拝，and said, “ Y o u have come
fro m fa r, and I have no answ er fo r y o u .”
D 6go’s a ctio n and w ords w e re deepest. To k n o w th a t
th e re is n o th in g to kn o w , and to g rie v e th a t i t is so
d iffic u lt to com m unicate th is “ n o th in g to k n o w ” to
othe rs,— th is is th e life o f Zen, th is is th e deepest th in g
in th e w o rld .
S ekisd (S h ih s h u a n g )石霜，becam e a m o n k w he n young,
and stu d ie d u n d e r Isan, th e n D ogo, b y w ho m he was
c e rtifie d . H e d ie d in 888. H e shows some o rig in a lity
in h is teach ing , b u t o th e rw is e th e re is n o t m uch to be
said about h im .
Sekiso asked Dogo (T a o w u ) 768-835, uA fte r a h u n
dre d years, i f someone asks a b o u t th e a bso lu te m eaning
o f th e universe , w h a t s h a ll I say to h im ? ” D6go called
th e b o y -a tte n d a n t, w ho came, and to ld h im f i l l up the
w a te r-b o ttle . Dogo w a ite d a w h ile , and th e n said to
Sekis6, “ W h a t was i t yo u asked ju s t n ow ? ” Sekiso
repeated th e question. D ogo th e re u p o n w e n t back to
h is room . A t th is , Sekiso becam e e n lig h te n e d .
T his k in d o f th in g shows a genius above even th a t
The Sutras 83
o f P la to o r M ich e la n g e lo , o r Bach h im s e lf. The

cre a tio n o f th e w o rld , its e v o lu tio n , its fin a l d e s tru c tio n ,
its e te rn ity and in fin ity is (to be seen in ) th e fillin g
o f a w a te r-b o ttle , in w a itin g , in re p e a tin g a question,
in going back to one’s room . N o w o n d e r Sekiso was
e n ligh ten e d. B u t a ll th is w as done b y Dogo, con
sciou sly; b y e ve ry Tom , D ic k , and H a rry also, b u t
unconsciously, b y e v e ry s tic k and stone, w h ic h “ th e
best o f us e xce l,” since th e y do a ll th a t th e y a re capable
o f; even Dogo does n o t do th is a lw ays.
A m on k asked Sekiso, “ W h a t is th e m eaning o f
D arum a’s co m ing fro m th e W est?” Sekiso snapped h is
teeth to g e th e r. T he m o n k d id n o t u nd ersta nd . A fte r
Sekis6’s death th e m o n k asked K y u h o (C h iu fe n g )
九峰，w h a t Sekiso had m ea nt b y s h u ttin g h is te eth.
K yu h o said, uF o r m y p a rt, I w o u ld ra th e r c u t o u t m y
tongue and n o t sham e m y c o u n try .” T he m o n k asked
U ngai ( Y iin k a i) 雲蓋，a b o u t it, w ho said, “ A m I an
enem y o f S ekis6’s?”
T his anecdote is ra th e r easy to und ersta nd , i f w e
rea lise th a t th e tr u th can be spoken o n ly i f w e speak,
o r sh u t o u r m ouths, tr u th fu lly . T he tr u th is n o t a
noun; i t is h a rd ly a v e rb , c e rta in ly n o t an a d je c tiv e .
“ In th e b e g in n in g w as th e W o rd .” F au st am ends th is
to, “ In th e b e g in n in g was th e A c t,” th a t is, a ctin g . I
w o u ld p re fe r to say, “ In th e b e g in n in g w as th e A d v e rb .”
“ God is lo v e .” “ 6 o d is lo v in g .” “ G od is lo v in g ly .”
A m on k asked Sekisd, “ Is th e m eaning o f D a ru m a ’s
com ing fro m th e W est co nta ine d in th e B u d d h is t te a ch -
ings?” “ I t is ,” re p lie d Sekis6. “ W h a t is th e m eaning
o f D arum a ’s co m ing fro m th e W est ta u g h t th e re ? ”
“ D on’t lo o k fo r i t in th e su tra s !” said Sekis6.
T his is v e ry good and cle a r. T he tr u th is in th e
B ib le , th e H o ly B ib le , b u t d on ’t lo o k in th e B ib le fo r
i t ! A s T h o re a u said, “ W hen yo u v is it God, don’t ask
to see one o f th e se rva nts.”
W hen Sekisd w as a t Isa n ’s he was in charge o f th e
rice . One day, w he n he w as s ie v in g it, Isa n said, ^D o n ^
84 Yakusan to Sekisd
s p ill th e d o n o r’s r ic e !” “I ’ m n o t s p illin g i t ! , said
Sekiso. Isa n p ic k e d up a g ra in o f ric e fro m th e flo o r,
show ed i t to Sekiso, and said, uW h a t do y o u m ean, n o t
s p illin g it? W here d id th is g ra in o f ric e com e fro m
then?” Sekis6 w as silent. Isa n went on, “ D on’t m ake
lig h t o f th is g ra in o f ric e . A h u n d re d thousand g ra in s a ll
come fro m th is one g ra in .” Sekiso said, M ay I ask
w h e re th is g ra in o f ric e comes fro m ? ” Isa n gave a
g re a t la u g h and w e n t b ack to h is room . T h a t evening
he said to th e m onks assem bled in th e h a ll, ^Y ou m onks,
th e re ’s an in se ct in y o u r r ic e !”
What pleased Isa n was Sekisa’s silence w hen he was
re p ro ve d , and h is a nsw ering back w hen he was
g ru m b le d a t too m uch. W here does life com e from ?
T h is que stion is no n e a re r b eing answ ered th a n i t ever
was. B u t does life “ com e,” anyw ay? Does sp rin g
“ com e”？ Do m en com e and go? Yes, life comes, b u t
i t also does n o t come. T he s ie v in g o f th e ric e is caused
by th e h u n g e r o f th e m onks, b u t i t is also causeless.
S ie vin g is ju s t sie vin g . W ith a ll o u r care, a g ra in o f
ric e is s p ille d , b u t God counts e ve ry g ra in o f rice ,
s p ille d and u n s p ille d .
A m on k came to Sekisd fro m K a n k e i (K u a n c h ‘i ) 灌溪，
Sekiso said to h im , <4O u r S o u th e rn te m p le is n o t as good

as h is N o rth e rn te m p le .” T he m o n k d id n o t kn o w w h a t
to say in re p ly . G oing b ack to K a n k e i, he rep orte d
w h a t Sekiso had said. K a n k e i e ried , “ W h y on earth
d id n 't yo u te ll Sekiso th a t I have p re p a re d th e N irv a n a
H a ll? ”
M onks used to tra v e l a bo ut th e c o u n try , v is itin g the
g re a t m asters o f Zen, and m a k in g odious com parisons
betw een them . Sekiso to ld th e m o n k he w as no b e tte r,
as a m aster o f Zen, th a n K a n k e i. Sekiso was Sekiso,
K a n k e i was K a n k e i; th e w illo w is green, th e flow ers
are red . W hen K a n k e i h ea rd w h a t Sekiso had said, he
to ld th e m on k th a t he was p re pa re d fo r death, th a t was
a ll- In th e face o f death, a ll c o m p e titio n and a m b itio n
is m eaningless. D ire c tly fa c in g death is indeed en
The Nehando 85
lig h te n m e n t its e lf. (T h e N e h a n d d ,涅槃堂，N irv a n a H a ll,

was th e m on aste ry in firm a ry . I t was also ca lle d M u jo d o ,
無常堂，H a ll o f Im perm anence, in w h ic h m onks w ere
supposed to be i l l and die, b u t m an y o f th em d id n o t
w ish to go to N irv a n a so q u ic k ly , so th e nam e was
changed to E n ju d 6 ,延寿堂，L ife -p ro lo n g in g H a ll.)
Chapter XII
SENSU, KASSAN, SHOZAN
Sensu (Ch‘u an tzii) 船子 , dates unknown, was a co

disciple of D6go under Yakusan, whom he assisted for
th ir ty years. A fte r he le ft Y akusan, he used to fe rry
a s m a ll boa t across th e riv e r, and teach Zen to those
b o a rd in g it,— fro m th is h is nam e “ B oatm an.” H e o fte n
lifte d up h is oar, and said, “ Do yo u und ersta nd ? ” He
passed on th e lin e o f Zen to Kassan. A t la s t, he tu rn e d
over the boat with his foot and sank into the water.
T he anecdotes co nce rn ing h im are fe w , p a rtly fro m his
la te r m ode o f life .
Kassan (C h ia s h a n )夾山，became a m on k w hen young,
and w as e n lig h te n e d b y Sensu. H e was noted fo r the
s e v e rity o f h is m ethod o f te ach ing . A m on k asked K as
san, ^H ow a bo ut w hen w e cle a r aw ay th e dust, and see
th e B uddha?” Kassan said, “ Y o u m u st w ie ld a sw ord !
I f yo u don’t, i t ’s a fish erm a n liv in g in a n e s t!’’ The
m on k b ro u g h t th e m a tte r up to Sekis6, and asked, “ H ow
about w hen w e cle a r aw ay th e d u st and see the
B uddha?” Sekiso answ ered, uH e is n o t in th e c o u n try ;
how can yo u m eet h im ? ” The m o n k w e n t back and
to ld Kassan w h a t Sekiso said. Kassan ascended the
ro s tru m and announced, uA s fo r m easures fo r those n o t
y e t e nlig h te n e d , th e re is no one lik e m e, b u t as fo r deep
speaking o f th e absolute, Sekiso is a h u n d re d paces
beyond m e.”
Kassan says th a t w hen yo u cle a r a w ay th e e ntangle
m ents o f reason and em otion, and see th e B uddha, you
m ust get rid o f th e B uddha h im s e lf, in o rd e r m e re ly to
see; yo u m ust n o t see som ething o r som ebody. Sekiso,
w hen th e same p ro b le m o f seeing th e B u dd h a was
Kassan 87
b ro u g h t up to h im , said th e same th in g , b u t d ire c tly ,

co n cre te ly, w ith o u t e x p la n a tio n o r in s tru c tio n , so
Kassan p ra ise d h im .
A m on k asked Kassan, “ W h a t is K assan’s ch a ra cte r
lik e ? ” H e re p lie d , m onkey, clasp ing its yo un g one,
goes back b e h in d th e b lu e m o u n ta in . A b ird h o ld in g a
flo w e r in its beak fa lls d ow n b e fo re th e green ro c k .”
T he answ er is, lo v e and b e a u ty,— and no ta lk o f Zen,
th a n k goodness (a n d b e a u ty ).
A m o n k o f K assan’s w e n t to K 6 te i (K a o t‘in g ) 髙亭，and
had ju s t bow ed to h im w hen K o te i s tru c k h im on th e
back. The m o n k bow ed again, and again K o te i s tru c k
h im , and d ro v e h im aw ay. T he m o n k to ld Kassan abo ut
ttiis , and Kassan asked, “ Do y o u u n d e rsta n d ? ” “ N o,”
re p lie d th e m on k. “ T h a t’s a good th in g ,” said K assan，
“ F o r i f yo u d id , I w o u ld be d um b fo u n d e d .”
N yogen S enzaki has a fin e com m ent on th is anecdote.
“ A m e rica n Zen is ru n n in g sidew ays, w ritin g books,
le c tu rin g , re fe rrin g to th e o lo g y, psycho lo gy, and w h a t
n o t. Som eone sh o u ld stand up and sm ash th e w h o le
th in g to p ie ces----- ’’
Kassan w as d o in g zazen w he n Tozan came and asked
h im , “ H o w a bo ut it? ” Kassen answ ered, “ J u s t lik e
th is .”
T h is k in d o f co n ve rsa tio n is a re lie f fro m th e som e
tim es excessive p a ra d o x and “ m y s te rific a tio n ” o f th e
Zen m asters, and is n e a re r to Z en b y its thusness.
Kassan had a m o n k w h o w e n t ro u n d a ll th e Zen
tem ples b u t fo u n d n o th in g to s u it h im a nyw he re. T he
nam e o f Kassan, h o w e ve r, w as o fte n m e n tio n e d to h im
fro m fa r and n e a r as a g re a t m aster, so he cam e b ack
and in te rv ie w e d Kassan, and said, “ Y o u have an
especial u n d e rs ta n d in g o f Zen. H o w is i t y o u d id n ’t
re ve a l th is to m e?” Kassan said, tcWhen y o u b o ile d
ric e , d id n ’t I lig h t th e fire ? W hen y o u passed ro u n d
the food (anyafciti, g y d e fc i,行益） d id n ’t I o ffe r m y b o w l
to you? W hen d id I b e tra y y o u r e xpe ctatio n s? ” T he
m onk was e n lig h te n e d .
88 Sensu, Kassan, Shozan
W e teach Zen, i f w e teach i t a t a ll, b y th e w a y we

w rite , th e w a y w e lig h t th e fire , o r h o ld o u t th e b o w l
to be fille d w ith ric e . I t is also tru e , h o w e ve r, th a t
th e re m ay be some in te lle c tu a l obstacle w h ic h p re ven ts
th e (p h y s ic a l) eye o r ear o r nose fro m p e rc e iv in g tru th
d ire c tly . In such a case, th e m eaning, th e in te lle c tu a l
m eaning o f th e w ords, m ay cause s a to ri, in th e sense
o f re m o v in g th a t in te lle c tu a l obstacle. In th e present
case, th e m onk, w ho is c a lle d “ a s m a ll m aste r,” 小師，
re a lise d in te lle c tu a lly th a t he had m ade a m istake in
d o in g th e ro u n d o f th e Zen m asters e xp e ctin g to get
som e thin g fro m them , o r fro m Kassan h im s e lf.
A m o n k asked Kassan, “ W h a t is th e W ay?” He
answ ered, “ T he sun o ve rflo w s o u r eyes; fo r te n thousand
leagues n o t a clo u d hangs in th e s k y .” “ W h a t is the
R eal F o rm o f th e U n ive rse ? ” asked th e m on k. “ [E ve n ]
th e fishes a t p la y in th e c le a r-flo w in g w a te r m ake th e ir
m istake s， ” re p lie d Kassan.
“ The W ay is n o t d iffic u lt,” was th e sa yin g o f S6zan.
W h a t is d iffic u lt is to get on it ; w hen yo u a re a c tu a lly
on it, i t is as easy as p ie ; life is lik e a day in th e open
a ir in e a rly sum m er. K assan’s answ er to th e second
q uestion, abo ut th e o rig in a l, th a t is, fu n d a m e n ta l fo rm
o f th e u n ive rse , is m ore d iffic u lt to understa nd . The
f^ rm is lik e p u re w a te r, b u t even in p u re w a te r the
im a g in a tio n clouds it ; a shadow is ta k e n fo r another
fish , a n o th e r fish is ta ke n fo r a shadow . G od is th o u g h t
o f as th e B ig F ish.
A m o n k asked Kassan, “ W h a t is th e O rig in a l
Teacher?” Kassan said, “ H e d rin k s th e w a te r; he
doesn’t w ash h is h a ir in th e s p rin g .”
I t is said th a t th e p oet has “ th e n a tu re o f th e sun,
th a t passes th ro u g h p o llu tio n s and its e lf rem ains as
p u re as b e fo re ,” b u t th is is n o t possible, and th e re fo re
n o t p ro p e r.
Kassan said to h is m onks，“ F in d m e in th e tip s of
a h u n d re d grasses; recognise th e P rin c e in a noisy
m a rk e t !n
Shozan 89
The heads o f a h u n d re d grasses also m eans n a tu ra l

phenom ena. W hen w e see th e leaves fa ll, th e sun ris e ,
th e fis h sw im , w e u n d e rsta n d th e m a ste r’s w ords. T he
P rince , th e v a lu e , th e p ro fo u n d m ea nin g is in th e con
fu s io n and d is o rd e r o f th is w o rld , n o t in B u d d h is t peace
o r some e a rth ly paradise.
W hen Kassan w as a b o u t to d ie , he c a lle d th e c h ie f
m onk, and said to h im , <4I have preached th e W a y to
th e m onks fo r m an y years. T he p ro fo u n d m ea nin g o f
B u ddhism is to be k n o w n b y each person h im s e lf. M y
illu s o ry life is o v e r; I am a b o u t to d e p a rt. Y o u m onks
should go on ju s t th e sam e as w he n I w as a liv e . Y o u
should n o t b lin d ly m ake o rd in a ry p eo ple m is e ra b le .”
H a vin g said th is , he im m e d ia te ly passed aw ay. Kassan
seems to have been a n ice s o rt o f chap.
Sh6zan (S h a o s h a n )韶山，dates u n k n o w n , was th e d is
c ip le o f Kassan. N o th in g is k n o w n o f h im e xce p t a fe w
anecdotes o f h is te a ch in g .
A m on k asked Sh6zan, “ Is th e re a sentence w h ic h does
n o t belong to th e re a lm o f r ig h t and w ro n g , to is and
is n ot? ” Shdzan said, “ T h e re is .” “ W h a t is it? ” asked
the m onk. “ A s in g le clo u d flo a tin g in th e s k y has n o th
in g u g ly a bo ut it . ”
To say so m e thin g w h ic h is lo g ic a lly n e ith e r a ffirm a tiv e
o r n e g a tive is h a rd ly possible, e xce p t fo r e xcla m a tio n s
lik e “ K w a tz !’’ o r b lo w s. Shozan indeed uses a k in d o f
double a lte rn a tiv e , in d e n y in g one o f th e p a irs , u g ly -
b e a u tifu l. T he p o in t is th a t th e s e n te n c e ,句，w h ic h is
n o t dichotom ous, is so because o f th e person w ho says
it, th e w a y he says it, h is sta te o f m in d b e fo re and
d u rin g and a fte r sa yin g it. T hus S h ozan^ sentence is
Sh6zan’s; w e can h a rd ly re p e a t i t as an e xam ple o f
absoluteness, fo r i t becomes re p e titio u s , a rtific ia l, and
ca lcu late d. W e m u s t h ave Ia g o ’s m o tive le ss m a lig n ity
w ith o u t th e m a lig n ity .
A m o n k said to Sh6zan, “ W h a t is th e sphere o f
Shdzan’s m in d ,境？， ’ Shdzan said, “ F ro m o ld e n tim e s
up to n o w , m onkeys and b ird s lifte d up th e ir voices,
th in b lu e m is t covered a ll th in g s .” T he m o n k asked,
90 Sensu, Kassan, Shozan
“ W ho is th e person in th is sphere o f m in d ? ” Shozan
sa id ，“ Be o ff w ith yo u !”
The monk had been given one difficult answer and
to ask fo r a n o th e r w as s im p ly greediness, w h ic h was
r ig h tly re p ro ve d . P erhaps, h o w e ve r, th e m o n k learned
m ore (Z e n ) fro m “ G et o u t !， ’ th a n fro m th e p o e tic a l
in s c ru ta b ility o f S hozan^ fir s t answ er.
A m o n k asked, “ W h a t is Sh6zan’s special Zen, 家
風？” Sh6zan re p lie d , “ O n th e to p o f a m o u n ta in , rootless
grass; th e leaves m o v in g , th o u g h th e re is no w in d .”
In th is answ er w e have th e co m p le m en t o f th e fo rm e r
one. T h in g s are as th e y are, and, a t th e same tim e ,
th in g s are n o t as th e y are. Trees g ro w fro m roo ts, and
a t th e same tim e th e y g ro w w ith o u t roots, w ith o u t cause
and e ffe c t; th e y g ro w lik e T opsy, ju s t g ro w . T he leaves
are m o vin g , n o t because th e re is an earthq u ake , b u t
because th e y ju s t w a n t to m ove:
T he r iv e r g lid e th a t its ow n sw eet w ill.
A m o n k cam e to Shozan, m ade an obeisance, p u t his

hands to g e th e r, and stood up. Shozan said, “ G reat
tim b e r is k e p t in a p o o r k in d o f house.” T he m on k then
passed b e fo re Shozan once. Shozan said, “ A m aster
w o rk m a n gets r id o f th e tim b e r.”
T h is is e x tre m e ly in te re s tin g , b u t n o t easy. T he g reat
tim b e r perhaps s ig n ifie s an e n lig h te n e d m onk, whose
appearance and m a n n e r a re fa r fro m e xu b e ra n t. O r it
m ay be Zen, o r th e B u dd h a n a tu re , seen u s u a lly in the
m ost u n lik e ly places. T he second re m a rk , th a t a m aster
ca rp e n te r uses up h is m a te ria ls to create som ething b e t
te r, a k ir k o r a b a rn , m ay w e ll s ig n ify th a t th e good
m o n k is, as fa r as he is concerned, a m eans, n o t an
end. Zen, and th e B u ddha n a tu re are th e same. The
B uddha m u st be k ille d , Zen m u st be transcended.
J u n fu n d (T su n p u n a ) 遵布衲 said to Sh6zan, “ A b o u t
th e c le a r m irro r,— I w o u ld lik e yo u to have a lo o k in
it . ” Sh6zan said, “ N o t a glance.” “ W h y n o t? ” asked
J u n fu n o . Shozan said, UA b ro k e n m irro r w ill n o t again
Shozan 91
re fle c t; fa lle n flo w e rs w ill n o t re tu rn to th e b ra n ch .”

T his o f course re fe rs to th e p oe m -con te st betw een
End and Jin s h u . E nd declare d th a t th e re was no m irro r,
and Shozan says th a t even i f th e re was th e illu s io n o f
one, th a t illu s io n , in h is case, has been fo r e ver d e s tro y
ed; i t is as dead as dead leaves. J u n fu n o was a se nior
m onk to Y akusan.
Chapter XIII
TOZAN
W hen Tozan was a c h ild , he becam e a m o n k in the

te m p le o f a V in a y a 1 p rie s t. O ne day th is p rie s t was
teaching the Ma/cahannya and when he came
to the passage, “No eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no
bod y, no c o n s c io u s n e s s ,T o z a n co uld n o t fo llo w the
p rie s t. A s fo r th e eye, lo o k in g a t th e V in a y a p rie st,
and w ith h is h and fe e lin g h is body, he said to him ,
“ T he M a ste r has eyes, ears, and so on, and I to o; w h y
does th e B u dd h a say w e h a ve n ’t? ” T he V in a y a p rie s t
w as astonished, and said, “ I ’m n o t th e te ach er fo r you;
y o u w ill one d ay be a g re a t M ahayana m is s io n a ry ,a n d
he sent h im o ff to be a m o n k u n d e r G oei (W uhsieh)
五拽，a d is c ip le o f Baso; he d ie d in 818.
Tozan said to U ng an ，“ M a ste r，i f someone asks me
a h u n d re d years a fte rw a rd s w h a t I th o u g h t was yo u r
deepest u n d e rs ta n d in g ,真，w h a t sh ou ld I say?” U ngan
answ ered, “ T e ll h im I said, ‘I t is s im p ly th is .’ ’’ Tozan
w as s ile n t fo r a tim e and U ngan said, ^ K a i,12 i f you
have grasped th is , y o u m u st c a rry i t o u t in d e ta il V*
Tozan was s till s ile n t. U ngan s tru c k h im . A fte rw a rd s ,
w he n Tozan was h o ld in g a se rvice in m e m o ry o f U n -
gan’s deepest u n d e rsta n d in g , a m o n k said to h im , “ The
dead teacher said, ‘I t is s im p ly th is !’ T h is is th e yea-
sa yin g s p irit? ” “ I t is ,” re p lie d T6zan. T he m on k ask-
ed, “ W h a t does th is m ean?” T6zan said, “ A t th a t tim e,
m y idea was a lm ost e n tire ly a m ista ke n one, th ou gh I
1. Of the Vinaya (discipline) School founded in China by Dosen

(Taohsttan)道宣，of the Tang dynasty.
2. Tdzan’s name was Ryokai.
The Buddha 93
understood w h a t he m ea nt a ll rig h t.” “ T he dead

te ach er,” said th e m o n k, “ d id he k n o w I t , 有，o r n o t? ”
T6zan said, “ I f he d id n ’t, h o w co u ld he say such th in g ;
and i f he d id , h o w co u ld he a vo id sa yin g it? ”
“ A h u n d re d years a fte rw a rd s ” m eans “ w he n y o u are
dead”；i f ta k e n lite r a lly , th e speaker w o u ld also have
gone to th e Y e llo w S p rin g s. “ I t is s im p ly th is ” is th e
v e ry essence o f Zen, th e p o in t b e in g in “ s im p ly .” A
th in g has e xisten ce v a lu e ; in fin ite m ea nin g in b e in g
w h a t i t is. E n lig h te n m e n t is p e rc e iv in g once fo r a ll
th is p o e tic fa c tu a lity , th is re lig io u s thusness. A n d i f
th e e n lig h te n m e n t is re a l, i t m u st be, as U ngan and
B la ke said, “ in m in u te d e ta ils ” o f d a ily life . T 6zan’s
answ ers to th e m o n k ’s questions a re m odels o f m odesty,
i f n o t o f lo g ic , and th e fo rm e r is m o re c o n v in c in g th a n
th e la tte r.
Tozan announced: “ Y o u m u s t k n o w th a t th e re is
som ething b eyond th e B u dd h a !” A t a c e rta in tim e a
m on k asked, “ W h a t is th is w h ic h transcends th e
B uddha?” T6zan answ ered, “ N o t B u dd h a !”
“ B u dd h a ” m eans e n lig h te n m e n t, o r Zen, o r th e
suprem e tru th . W h a t is beyond th is? T he a nsw er
c le a rly is, d e lu sio n , n o n -Z e n , a ll b u t th e suprem e
tru th . G od, righteousness, courage, self-lessness,— these
are easy to u n d e rsta n d . B u t th e D e v il, e v il, co w a rd ice,
selfishness,— w ho can e x p la in these? As C h ris t said,
“ I f y o u r righteousness does n o t exceed th a t o f th e
P harisees----- ’’ W e h ave to b re a k o u t o f goodness, ta ste
th e u n iq u e fla v o u r o f ugline ss, e n jo y th e lie s and
h y p o c ris y o f h u m a n n a tu re ,— as w e a c tu a lly do, w h e n
ever w e la u g h . R ea l Zen m eans n e v e r to stop la u g h in g .
T6zan said to h is m onks, “ W ords do n o t express th in g s ;
ta lk in g does n o t m eet th e v ita l occasion; those w ho ac
cept phrases p e ris h ; p eo ple w h o hang ro u n d sentences
becom e d e lu d e d .”
T a k in g these F o u r S tatem ents one b y one, i t is tru e
th a t w o rd s do n o t express th in g s . Words a re (a n
essential p a rt o f) th in g s . A th in g w ith o u t a w o rd s tr ic t
ly sp ea kin g has no (h u m a n ) existence. B u t, a th in g
94 Tdzan
o r a w o rd ,— e ith e r w ill do. One is n o t s u p e rio r to th e

o th e r. “Talking does n o t m eet th e v ita l occasion,
機 This also is not correct. Zen talking (not talking
about Zen) will m eet any occasion. “ Those w h o accept
phrases p e ris h .,> T h is is tru e enough, because phrases
in v e n te d b y som ebody else do n o t speak to o u r co nd i
tio n , and o u r c o n d itio n does n o t speak th em . T he last,
“ Those w ho hang ro u n d sentences becom e deluded,
applies equally to politicians, scientists, and “literary”
people. K eats, M ilto n , Shakespeare, Spenser, a gre at
n um be r o f g re a t E n g lis h w rite rs delud ed them selves,
b e fu d d le d them selves w ith b e a u tifu l w ords. T h is is
w h a t W o rd s w o rth fe lt, b u t too va g u e ly , too tra n s ito rily .
T6zan, to g e th e r w ith H a k u ( P a i) 伯，a p rie s t o f the
m y s tic s c h o o l’ e n te re d a p a s try -c o o k ’s a tth e s a m e tim e .
T he m y s tic p rie s t d re w a c irc le on th e gro un d, and said,
“ T ake i t a w a y !，， T6zan said, “ P ic k i t up and b rin g
i t h e re !” T he m y s tic p rie s t had no m ore to say.
T h is episode re m in d s us o f th e c o m p e titio n th a t w e n t
on in C hin a am ong th e v a rio u s sects, unaccom panied
h o w e ve r b y th e p e rse cu tio n and c a lu m n y o f th e W est.
One m ore p o in t to n o tic e is th a t o n ly c le v e r people
can u n d e rsta n d Zen o r be good, o r w rite p o e try or
com pose m usic. T he q u e stio n rem ain s h ow eve r, w h a t
is th e m ea nin g o f “ c le v e r”？ W e ll, i f y o u are “ c le ve r”
yo u k n o w it, o th e rw is e ___
S 6m itsu (S e n g m i)僧密，and T6zan w e re crossing a
riv e r to g e th e r. Tozan said, “ D on’t m ake a m ista ke in
w h e re yo u tre a d !’’ S 6m itsu said, “ I f I d on’t m ake a m is
ta ke h ow can I cross th e riv e r? ” Tozan said, uW ho is
he th a t m akes no m ista ke ? ” S 6 m itsu said, “ H e w ho
crosses th e w a te r w ith an e n lig h te n e d m an .”
T h is re m in d s us o f C h ris tia n and F a ith fu l, o r ra th e r,
o f C h ris tia n and M r. G re a th e a rt. I t is th e ju s tific a tio n
o f th e R om an C a th o lic C hu rch , w ith its banned books.
B u t i t is tru e enough, th e fu n c tio n o f g re a t m en is to
reduce, s lig h tly , th e n u m b e r o f o u r m istakes.
A m on k said to Tozan, <4Y o u a lw a ys te ll le a rn e rs to
The Triple Synopsis 95
ta ke th e W a y o f th e B ird s ; w h a t is th is W ay o f th e
B ird s ? ” T6zan said, “ Y o u m eet nob od y on it . ” T he
m on k th e n asked, “ H ow can w e go on th is W ay?” Tozan
answ ered, “ B y egolessness, a tte n d in g to each step as
i t comes.” T he m o n k said, “ Is n ’t th e B ird s ’ W ay th e
e as one’s o rig in a l n a tu re ? ” Tozan said, uO m onk,
do y o u get e v e ry th in g u p s id e -d o w n ,” 3 T he m on k
asked, “ W h a t is th is place w h e re people get th in g s
u p sid e -d o w n ? ” 34 Tozan said, “ I f th e re w e re no to p s y
tu rv in e s s h ow co u ld a s e rv a n t becam e a lo rd ? ” The
m onk asked, “ W h a t is o u r o rig in a l n a tu re ? ” Tozan
answ ered, “ N o t ta k in g th e W ay o f th e B ird s .” 5
In th e end, Tozan has to go back to Laotse, and say,
“ The w a y w h ic h can be c a lle d a (b ird ’s) w a y is n o t th e
E te rn a l W a y.” “ M e e tin g n obody on it , ” 一 th is is as good
a te st o f th e W a y as any. T he “ W a y o f th e B ird s ” is
th e fir s t o f T6zan’s T hre e W ays. T he second is The
S ecret W a y ,玄路，n o t v e ry d iffe re n t fro m th e firs t, in
m eaning a w a y beyond is -a n d -is -n o t, e n lig h te n m e n t and
d elusion. T he th ird is T he O u tstre tch e d H a n d ,展手，
to save o thers.
T6zan ta u g h t A T rip le S y n o p s is ,三種綱要. F irs t, 敲
唱倶行，K n o c k in g and a n sw e rin g , com panionate a c tiv ity .
The d is c ip le w a n ts to le a rn , and is ta u g h t; d is c ip le and
m aster “ w o rk ” to g e th e r a t th e d is c ip le ’s s a lv a tio n .
S e co n d ,金鎖玄路，G olden ch ain, secret p a th . O u r re la
tio n w ith th e B u dd h a is a “ g o ld e n ” one, b u t i t is also
a k in d o f b in d in g . T he th ird is 不堕凡聖，N o t d is tin
g u ish in g w ise m en and fo o ls. T h is, to a s e n s itiv e and
in te llig e n t person, is perhaps th e m ost d iffic u lt.
A m o n k said to Tozan, ftA m o n k has d ie d ; w h e re has
he gone?” Tozan answ ered, “ A fte r th e fire , a s p ro u t
o f grass.”
3. To assert that a cat is an animal is to get the matter upside-

down.
4. Making mistakes is an essential part of human nature, the
Buddha nature.
5. Be Upside-down !
96 Tdzan
I ta k e th is to m ean, “ H e is as dead as a d o o r-n a il. H e
has gone n ow here. H e has ceased to e x is t. A t th e same
tim e , life , in some fo rm o r o th e r co ntin ue s, a t p resent
a n yw a y.” T h is q ue stion o f th e a fte r-life , w h ic h is
m ix e d up w ith th e n o tio n o f re in c a rn a tio n , does n o t
o fte n a rise ; th e m ost in te re s tin g re p ly is th e fo llo w in g .
Seppo said to Gensha, 4<M o n k S hinso asked m e w here
a c e rta in dead m o n k had gone, and I to ld h im i t was
lik e ice becom ing w a te r.” Gensha said, “ T h a t was a ll
rig h t, b u t I m y s e lf w o u ld n o t have answ ered lik e th a t.”
“ W h a t w o u ld yo u have said?” asked Seppo. Gensha
re p lie d , “ I t ’s lik e w a te r re tu rn in g to w a te r.”
A m o n k said to Tozan, UA snake is s w a llo w in g a fro g ;
is i t r ig h t to save th e fro g , o r n o t to save it? ” Tozan
re p lie d , “ I f yo u save it, y o u do n o t see w ith tw o eyes;
i f yo u do n o t save it, th e fo rm does n o t show its
shadow .”
I f w e rescue th e fro g fro m th e snake, w e are lo o k in g
o n ly on one side, fo rg e ttin g th e snake’s p o in t o f vie w .
I f w e le t i l l alone, w e do n o t express o u r n a tu ra l desire
to p ro te c t th e w ea k fro m th e stro n g . Anecdotes con
c e rn in g snakes are n o t m any, b u t a re a ll in te re s tin g .
K y6 se i (C h in g c h in g )鏡清，a d is c ip le o f Sepp6, one day
asked a m o n k w h a t noise i t w as outsid e th e door. The
m o n k said i t was a snake b itin g a fro g . K y6 se i said, “ I
th o u g h t life was s u ffe rin g ; b u t s u ffe rin g is life .”
W h ile Tozan was w a sh in g h is bow ls, he saw tw o crow s
fig h tin g o v e r a fro g , and a m o n k w ho w as th e re asked
h im , “ W h a t do such th in g s com e on th e e a rth fo r? ”
T6zan answ ered, “ J u s t fo r y o u r sake.”
A c c o rd in g to C h ris tia n ity th e w o rld was m ade fo r
m an, n o t fo r its e lf. M an y people th in k th a t th in g s are
lik e Topsy, w ho “ ju s t g ro w e d .” T he m od ern v ie w is
th a t th in g s e x is t fo r th e ir ow n sakes, o r perhaps ju s t
e xist, w ith o u t any ^sake^ a t a ll. Tozan says uF o r y o u r
sake,” and th is is tru e , th o u g h o n ly h a lf th e tru th , as
is e ve ry statem ent. T hin gs e x is t fo r th e ir ow n sake, a
h u n d re d percen t, and fo r o u r sake, a h u n d re d percent.
T6zan w e n t to see N ansen. A t th is tim e th e y w ere
Isan 97
h o ld in g an a n n iv e rs a ry m e e tin g fo r B a so^ d eath. N a n

sen said to assem bled m onks, uW e a re going to ce le b ra te
Baso to m o rro w . Do yo u th in k he w ill be pre sen t, o r n o t? ”
No one am ong th e m onks answ ered; b u t Tozan said,
“ H e w ill w a it fo r a com panion, and w ill com e i f he
comes.” N ansen said, “ T h is m an is young, b u t he can
be shaped and p o lish e d .” Tozan said, “ Y o u r grace
should n o t d is lik e a good m an and re g a rd h im as
w o rth le ss.”
“ P resent, o r n o t pre sen t? ” S u p e rs titio n says, “ P re -
sent”；com m on sense says, “ N o t p re se n t.” Zen is n e ith e r.
W hat does i t say? I t says, w ith p o e try , “ P resent o r n o t
present?” Tozan says th e dead m aste r w ill w a it fo r a
com panion. W ho is th e com panion o f an e n lig h te n e d
man? T he answ er c le a rly is G od, b u t w ho is God? God
is love . I f y o u lo v e Baso he w ill com e and m ake h is
abode w ith you.
T6zan w e n t to see Isan, and said to h im , “ R e ce n tly I
heard th a t Tozan o f N anyo spoke o f in s e n tie n t beings
pre ach ing th e L a w , b u t I can’t g et to th e b o tto m o f it . ”
Isan said, “ D o y o u rem em be r w h a t w as said?” ul re
m em ber i i f" said Tozan. ^T hen tr y and re p e a t w h a t
was said,” said Isan. Tozan reco un te d th e fo llo w in g .
A m on k asked (N a n y o ) w h a t th e m in d o f th e a n cie n t
Buddhas was, and he re p lie d , “ I t is fences, w a lls , and
b ro ken tiles®•” T he m o n k said, “ Fences, w a lls and
b ro ke n tile s a re in s e n tie n t, a re n ’t th e y ? ” N an y6 said,
“ T h a t is so.” “ Do th e y expound B u d d h ism ? ” asked th e
m onk. “ A lw a y s , and b u s ily ,” said N an yd. T he m on k
said, ‘W h y d on ’t I h e a r i t th e n ? ” N anyo answ ered,
“ Y ou don’t h ea r it, b u t y o u sh o u ld n ’t p re v e n t othe rs
d oing so.” 67 “ W ho hears it? ” asked th e m on k. “ A ll th e
saints,” answ ered N an yd.8 “ Does y o u r grace h ea r it? ”
6. Compare Wordsworth’s
The bleak music from that old stone wall.
7. Nanyo should have answered, “ You do, but you don’t know
you do.”
8. This is doubtful, unless we define, as I would like to, a saint
as an anlmist.
98 Tdzan
asked the monk. “ Not I !，
，re p lie d Nany6. “ I f yo u (Jon’t
hear it, how can yo u e x p la in th e te a ch in g o f th e L a w
by in a n im a te crea ture s? ” asked th e m onl^. N an yo an
sw ered, “ I t ’s m y good lu c k I don’t h e a r it. I f I d id , I
w o u ld be th e same as a ll th e s a in ts ， 0 and t h = you
w o u ld n ’t have th e chance to hea r m y te a ch in g . The
m o n k said, “ I f th a t is so, people w o u ld h ave no p a rt in
it . ” N anyo said, UI m y s e lf e xpound i t fo r th e sake o f
people, n o t fo r th e sake o f th e sa in ts.** T he m o n k said,
“ A fte r th e people h ea r it, w h a t th en ? ” ‘T h e n th e y ， re
n o t ju s t people any m ore,” re p lie d N any6. T he m onk
asked “ W h a t s u tra does th e d o c trin e com e in ? ” N anyo
answ ered, ^ C le a rly , th e S u p e rio r M an w ill n o t say a n y
th in g o u t o f accord w ith th e su tra s.u H avenH y o u read
in th e K egon K y o , ^C ountries expound it, people ex
pound it, a ll th in g s o f th e past, p resent, and fu tu re ex
pound i t ,?>, W ith th is Tozan fin is h e d h is account, and
Isa n said, UI have m y ow n (ideas abo ut it,) b u t fe w
persons th e re are (w h o w a n t to h e a r th e m ) T o z a n said,
“I， m n o t cle a r a bo ut th e m a tte r; w o n ’t y o u teach m e?”
Isan h e ld up h is h a ir d u ste r,12 and said, “ Do yo u u n d e r
stand?” “ I don’t,” said Tdzan, “ e x p la in !” Isan said,
uT he m o u th w e re ce ive fro m o u r fa th e r and m o th e r can
n o t e x p la in it.^ T6zan asked, “ Is th e re anyone else
w ho loves th e W a y as y o u do?” Isa n said, “ F ro m here,
go to H o ry o i P re fe c tu re , n e a r th e S tone Room , and
yo u w ill fin d U ngan D o ji n . I f y o u can te ll w h ic h w ay
th e w in d b lo w s fro m th e w a v in g o f th e grass, yo u w ill
c e rta in ly v a lu e h im ___ ’’ Tozan said goodbye to Isan
and w e n t to U ngan. H e to ld h im w h a t had le d up to
th is m a tte r, and asked, “ W ho can h e a r th is S oul-less
T eaching?” U ngan re p lie d , “ S oul_less beings can hear2 1
0911
9. Would know nothing about the Buddhist teaching of usoul-

lessM objects.
10. This is quibbling. He means that the saints don’t teach, or
teach silently, but this is suppositious.
11. This should have been said ironically.
12. Isan is now letting a thing teach Buddhism, or helping it
to do so.
Inanimate Teaching 99
it . ” T6zan asked, “ C an yo u h e a r it, o r n o t? ” “ I f I hea r
it, y o u can’t h e a r m y te a c h in g .’’18 T6zan asked, “ W h y
can’t I h ea r it? ” 1 31451 U ngan ra ise d h is m o sq u ito d u ste r,
and said, “ Y o u h e a r it? ” “ I d on ’t,” re p lie d T6zan. U n
gan said, uY o u ^ 11*t h e a r even m y te a ch in g , le t alone
th a t o f in a n im a te th in g s .” T6zan asked in w h a t s u tra
th e te a ch in g o f B u d d h ism b y so u l-le ss th in g s w as ta u g h t.
U ngan asked h im i f he had n o t rea d in th e A m id a K y o ,
‘W a te rs , b ird s , trees and fo re s ts a ll re p e a t th e B u d d h a ’s
nam e, and p ro c la in th e L a w .” A t th is Tozan was en
lig h te n e d , and m ade a ve rse :
M a rv e llo u s ! M a rv e llo u s !
H o w -m yste rio us th e In a n im a te -T e a c h in g !
I t is d iffic u lt to h e a r w ith th e ears;
W hen w e h e a r w ith th e eyes, th e n w e k n o w i t \w
The d o c trin e o f th e te a ch in g o f B u d d h is m b y n o n -
se n tie n t b e in g s ,無倩説法，o rig in a te d w ith N any6, b o rn
775, th e d is c ip le o f th e 6 th P a tria rc h . In B u d d h ism , n o t
in Zen, th is w o u ld h ave a p a n th e is tic m eaning, b u t th e
question arises, w h a t is th is B u d d h ism w h ic h ro cks and
stream s teach us? T he answ er is , th e y teach us th a t
th e y teach us. T h e y teach us th e ir e x is te n c e -v a lu e . A ll
te ach ing is th u s n o n -s e n tie n t, n o t-in te lle c tu a l, n o n -e m o -
tio n a l. A h um an b eing , as U ng an says, teaches
b efo re he opens h is m o u th w h a t in a n y case he can
n eve r say. W h a t is w ro n g w ith w o rd s is s im p ly th a t
th e y are la te , la te a rriv a ls in w o rld h is to ry . So, as
Tozan says in h is verse, i t is b e tte r to h e a r w ith th e
eyes, w h ic h are e a rly .
A m o n k asked Tozan, “ W h a t is th e M y s te ry o f
m y s te rie s ,玄中又玄？” T6zan said, “ I t is lik e th e to ng ue
13. “ When I am in the state of hearing the teaching of so-called

inanimate, soul-less objects, I am not teaching you about it.'*
14. Their teaching.
15. Hearing with the eyes, smelling with the ears, seeing with
the nose, is a mark of a Buddha. Perhaps Tozan here refers to
seeing the mosquito duster raised by Ungan. In any case Tozan^
enlightenment ostensibly came from the words of the sutra.
100 Tdzan
o f a dead m an.”
T he phrase comes fro m Laotse, w h ic h perhaps th e
m on k had been re a d in g . T6zan says i t is lik e a dead
m a n ^ tongue, w h ic h is m ore e xpressive , n o t less, th a n
a liv in g m an ’s. I t is a fa c t, th e deeper w e go, th e m ore
e xpressive th in g s becom e, th e less d um b and s ile n t.
T h a t is w h y stic k s and stones are so p o e tic a l.
T6zan ascended th e ro s tru m and said, “ T h e re is one
w ho, in th e m id s t o f a thousand people, te n thousand
people, does n o t a vo id any o f them , does n o t seek a fte r
any o f them . T e ll m e, w h a t k in d o f m an is he?” Ungo
cam e fo rw a rd and said, “ I am h e re in th e H a ll10.”
T h is is th e p ro p e r Zen answ er. N o t, “ I am th a t m an,
M a tt D illo n ,” b u t, “ I am h e re .” T he “ O ne” w ho n e ith e r
desires n o r loathes is n o t I, and n o t n o t I. H e is n o t a
person, b u t n o t n o n -p e rso n a l. God is n o t lo v e ; he is not
an a b s tra c tio n ; b u t also he is n o t a n th ro p o m o rp h ic. God
is n o t he, b u t also n o t it.
Tozan w as lo o k in g a t th e ric e -fie ld , w h e re th e head
m on k Ro was le a d in g an ox. T6zan said, “ Be c a re fu l
w ith th a t o x; he’l l eat th e ric e •” Rd said, “ I f th is ox
w e re a good one, he w o u ld n ’t eat it.”
A w e ll-tra in e d o x w ill n o t eat th e ric e . (T h e Chinese
had n o t read, “ T ho u s h a ll n o t m uzzle th e o x th a t treads
th e c o rn .’ ’） H ere w e see a d iffe re n c e betw een the
m a te ria l and th e s p iritu a l. D iv id e d , lo v e su ffers no
decrease, b u t ric e is a d iffe re n t m a tte r. F o r th is reason
also, sym bols a re a lw a ys to be avoided, o r used o n ly as
a k in d o f game.
W hen Tozan was sa yin g g oo d-bye to N angen, the
la tte r said to h im , “ S tu d y B u d d h ism w id e ly , and p ro fit
(y o u rs e lf and o th e rs ).” Tozan re p lie d , 4<S tu d y in g B u d
dhism w id e ly , th a fs a ll rig h t, m ay be, b u t w h a t on
e a rth is th is abo ut p ro fit? ” N angen said, “ I t means
re je c tin g n o th in g w h a te v e r, th a t，
s w h a t i t m eans.” 61
16. This sentence• 某甲参堂去 , can also be interpreted, “I am go

ing back to the monks’ hafl.” In this case, the going back Is '*the
one,”
Death 101
Tozan q u ite r ig h tly o b je cte d to th e id e a o f p ro fit, b u t

a fte r a ll, as C h ris t ta u g h t, w e seek fir s t th e k in g d o m o f
God, b u t w illy - n illy , “ a ll these th in g s s h a ll be added
u n to y o u .” W e are to seek s u ffe rin g fo r its ow n sake,
n o t m a s o c h is tic a lly , fo r some s p iritu a l p ro fit; b u t d e p th
and s tre n g th a re in e v ita b ly added xinto us.
T he re w as a m o n k i l l in th e in firm a ry w h o asked to
see Tozan. W hen Tozan w e n t th e re , th e m o n k said to
h im , “ W h y d on ’t yo u save o rd in a ry people?” Tozan
asked h im , ‘W hose is y o u r fa m ily ? ” T he m o n k re p lie d ,
“ A g re a t ic c h a n tik a fa m ily .” Tozan re m a in e d s ile n t
fo r som e tim e . T hen th e m o n k said, “ W h a t s h a ll w e
do w he n th e F o u r M o u n ta in s com e p re ssin g ro u n d us?”
Tozan said, (iI m y s e lf cam e fro m u n d e r th e ro o f o f a
fa m ily .” 17 T he m o n k said, €<Is th e re r e la tiv ity , o r no
re la tiv ity ? ” T 6zan answ ered, “ N one.” T he m o n k asked,
‘W h e re w ill y o u le t m e go?” “ To a ric e fie ld ,” a n sw e r
ed T6zan. m o n k heaved a sigh, and said, “ G ood
bye,” and d ie d s ittin g th e re . Tozan ta pp ed h im on th e
head th re e tim e s w ith h is s ta ff, and said, “ L ik e th is ,
you k n e w h o w to die , b u t n o t h o w to liv e .”
T h is anecdote has so m e thin g u n u su a l a b o u t it. W e
fe e l in i t a h um an w a rm th th a t is b eyond even Zen.
The d y in g m o n k is e v id e n tly th in k in g o f h is o ld hom e,
and th e p eo ple in i t w h o h ave no B u dd h a n a tu re , no
prospect o f s a lv a tio n . Tozan th in k s too o f h is ow n.
The F o u r M o u n ta in s th a t hang o v e r us are b irth , i l l
ness, o ld age, and d eath. “ R e la tiv ity ,” e g o ,回互，m eans
th e u n d e r-re la tio n o f tw o th in g s , “ N o m an liv e th u n to
h im s e lf.” Besides th is th e re is fu~ego; each th in g is
its e lf, has an a bso lu te in d e p e n d e n t e xisten ce and “ ow ns
no o th e r k in .” Tozan answ ers, C(F u~ eg o/f b u t w h a t he
should say is th a t Zen transcends b o th . “ To a ric e -
fie ld ” is a stra n g e expression. I t re m in d s us o f a verse
b y W illia m M o rris , a b o u t d eath, th e dea th o f a w om an;
it ends:
17. Tozan has been thinking his own thoughts, forgetting the
dying monk.
102 Tozan
Speak b u t one w o rd to m e o ve r th e co rn ,
O ve r th e te n d e r, b o w ^ lo cks o f th e co rn .
^R e tu rn to th e absolute, to n a tu re , to th e u n d iffe re n tia t

ed, w he re y o u sh ou ld have been a ll y o u r life l" says
T6zan to th e d y in g m an. “ Y o u d ie d w e ll,” T6zan te lls
th e seated corpse, “ b u t in y o u r life y o u dou bte d and
dich otom ised , y o u separated y o u rs e lf fro m y o u r fa m ily
in th o u g h t, in ste a d o f re a lis in g th a t in life , as in death,
a ll is one, and one is a ll.” 18
A c e rta in head m o n k answ ered in n in e ty s ix va rio u s
w ays b e fo re T6zan accepted it, saying, “ W h y d id n ’t you
say so b e fo re ? ” T he re w as a n o th e r m o n k w ho heard
a ll th e o th e r answ ers, b u t d id n ’t catch th e la s t one. He
k e p t on a skin g th e head m o n k a bo ut it, b u t he w o u ld
n o t te ll h im . T h is s o rt o f th in g w e n t on fo r th e th re e
years th e y w e re to g e th e r w ith th e ir w a te r-b a s in and
to w e l, b u t th e head m o n k s till refu sed to re v e a l i t to
th e o th e r. A t la s t th e head m o n k fe ll ill, and th e o th e r
said to h im , “ I have asked y o u n ow fo r th re e years to
te ll m e w h a t y o u said. I do n o t now ask fo r p ity . I f
I can’t g et i t b y fa ir m eans, I w ill do so b y fo u l,” and,
th re a te n in g h im w ith a k n ife , said, “ T e ll m e, o r I ’l l
k ill yo u V* T he head m o n k said fe a rfu lly , “ W a it a
m om ent, I ’l l te ll y o u !” T hen he added, “ B u t even i f I
do, yo u w o n ’t get w h a t y o u re a lly w a n t!” T he o th e r
m o n k bow ed.
T h is is a v e ry c re d ib le s to ry , w h e th e r i t a c tu a lly
happened o r n o t. T he in te re s tin g p o in t is th a t w hen
th e m o n k was p ro m ise d w h a t he w an te d, he d id n ， t w ant
i t a ny m ore, and was e n lig h te n e d . E n lig h te n m e n t means
n o t w a n tin g e n lig h te n m e n t a n y m ore, because yo u have
it. T hus te n g o ,転語，“ tu rn in g w o rd ,” w h ic h th e o th e r
m on k w ishe d to be to ld , is n o t a w o rd e xpressing the
tu rn in g , b u t th e v e ry tu rn in g its e lf. T he w o rd is the
tu rn in g , and th e tu rn in g is th e w o rd .
W hen Tozan was d y in g , a m on k said to h im , ^M aster,
18. W e are seven.

Death 103
y o u r fo u r elem ents19, 四大，a re o u t o f h a rm o n y, b u t is
th e re anyone w ho is n e ve r ill? ” “ T h e re is ,” said T6zan.
“ Does th is one lo o k a t yo u ? ” asked th e m on k. “ I t is m y
fu n c tio n to lo o k a t h im ,” answ ered T6zan. “ H o w a b o u t
w hen yo u y o u rs e lf lo o k a t h im ? ” asked th e m on k. “ A t
th a t m om ent I see no illn e s s ,” re p lie d T6zan.
T he absolute, th a t is o u r re a l s e lf, is n e ith e r w e ll n o r
ill. H e is a lw a ys lo o k in g a t us, b u t i t is o u r jo b to lo o k
a t h im , and w he n w e do, as S t. J u lia n a d id a t th e “ w ra th
o f G od,” w e say as she d id , “ I saw no w ra th , b u t on
m an’s p a rt.”
19. Earth, water, fire, and wind.

Chapter X IV
SOZAN AND UNGO
S6zan (T s ‘a o s h a n )曹山，firs t stu d ie d C on fucianism ,

th en becam e a p rie s t a t th e age o f n in etee n. H e was
ta u g h t b y Tozan, w hose Zen he rece ive d and propagated.
H e d ie d in 901, aged s ix ty tw o . H is e n lig h te n e d d is
cip le s w e re fo u rte e n . H e was n o t so successful a teacher
n o r as g re a t m an as U ngo, h is fe llo w d is c ip le , b u t as
a c o -fo u n d e r o f th e Soto Sect o f Zen he m u st have had
c e rta in a b ilitie s o r m e t a c e rta in need, and h is F iv e
R a n k s ,五位，m ade h im fam ous.
W hen Sozan saw Tozan fo r th e fir s t tim e , he was
asked h is nam e. “ H o n j a ku (P e n c h i)本寂 he re p lie d .
“ W h y don’t yo u answ er m e a b s o lu te ly ? ” asked T6zan,
“ I w o n ’t,” S6zan answ ered. “ W h y n o t? ” said T6zan.
“ Because m y nam e is n o t H o n ja k u ,” S6zan re p lie d .
Tozan recognised S ozan^ a b ility and prom ise.
W hen Sozan is asked h is nam e he answ ers in the
re la tiv e w o rld . In th e a bso lu te w o rld even m y cat,
le t alone God, is nam eless. B u t i t is o n ly those w ho
k n o w th a t a ll th in g s a re nam eless, th a t can tr u ly give
nam es to th in g s .
S6zan was ta k in g le a ve o f T6zan, w ho asked h im ,
‘W h e re a re yo u o ff to ? ” S6zan answ ered, “ To th e place
w h e re n o th in g c h a n g e s .T o z a n said, uH o w can you
go to such a place?” Sozan answ ered, <eGo to is also
an u n -c h a n g in g .”
S6zan’s answ er is ta ke n fro m th e phrase, U nchang
in g N a tu re , 不変異性，〇ne o f th e T w e lv e Aspects o f
th e U ltim a te ,十二真如• I t corresponds to th e Im m u ta b le
B h u ta th a ^ a ,不変易性，in c o n tra d is tin c tio n to th e re la tiv e
o r c o n d itio n e d a b s o lu te ,不変随緑. Thi s co n ve rsa tio n is
Sozan 105
reminiscent of that of En6 and “One-night’s-lodging-

K a k u .” x 〇„
S6zan asked a monk, “Where have you come from?,.
The monk said, “I have just been cleaning the temple.”
S6zan asked him, “Did you clean the back of the
Buddha, or the front?” The monk replied, “Both, at
the same time.” S6zan said, “Kindly pass me my
surplice!”
Sozan seems to have fe lt th a t he had been o u t
sm arted, b u t to have th e la s t w o rd (an d in Zen th is
is a ll-im p o rta n t, th o u g h th e w o rd m a y be a b lo w ) gave
his opinion of the monk，s answer in his donning the
s u rp lic e to show th a t th e m o n k had passed h is e xa m in a
tio n a t le a st v e rb a lly .
A monk said to S6zan, “I， Seizei, a poor lonely
crea ture , ask y o u fo r y o u r h e lp .^ Sozan said, ^M a ste r
S e i!” S eizei answ ered，“ Yes?” Sozan said, UA fa n n e r
ca lle d H a ku , th o u g h he has d ru n k th re e b o w ls o f w in e ,
says he has n o t m oistened h is lip s .”
T h is episode fo rm s th e 10th Case o f th e M u m o n ka n .
Sozan^ answ er is u s u a lly ta k e n as a re p ro o f o f th e
m onk’s posing as in a sta te o f s p iritu a l and m a te ria l
p o v e rty . I f he w e re tr u ly in th is c o n d itio n he w o u ld
be as C h ris t said th e p oo r are, blessed, and w o u ld n o t
need to ask Sozan fo r a n y th in g . S p a n ’s answ er m ay
also be ta k e n as an e xa m p le o f th e Zen d o in g -n o t-
doing.
A m on k said to S6zan, “ L e a rn e rs are ju s t one mass
o f illn e s s ; w o n ’t yo u cu re th em ? ” “ N o t I !’’ said
S6zan. **W hy n o t,” asked th e m o n k. “ Because,” an
sw ered S6zan, “ i f y o u get m e to search fo r life , I can’t
fin d it ; death also, I can’t fin d i t !’’
Illn e ss, s p iritu a l o r p h y s ic a l (an d perhaps th e y a re
re a lly one) is th in k in g y o u a re i l l and w is h in g to be
cured. A n im a ls sleep w h e n th e y fe e l u n w e ll, and get
b e tte r o r d ie . W e ca n n o t fin d life , w e ca nn ot fin d d e a th ;
to lo o k fo r one o r n o t to lo o k fo r th e o th e r,— th is is
illn ess.
106 Sozan and Ungo
A m o n k asked S6zan, “ H ow a bo ut w he n w e do n o t
w ea r clothes o f m o u rn in g ? ” S6zan said, “ T oday m y
filia l p ie ty is a t its m a x im u m .” The m o n k said, “ H ow
abo ut a fte r th a t? ” S6zan said, “ I lo v e to be b lin d
d ru n k !’’
T he m o n k seems to be a skin g abo ut th e C on fu cia n
d u tie s o f fa th e r to son. W hen a fa th e r d ie d, th e son
was supposed to w e a r m o u rn in g clothes fo r th re e years.
C h ris t said th a t a m an m u st hate h is fa th e r and m oth er
and fo llo w h im . T he Zen answ er to th e o b je ctio n s o f
C hinese p ie ty w as m ore c o n c ilia to ry th a n C h ris t’s; it
asserted th a t n o -filia l-p ie ty was th e re a l filia l-p ie ty .
T he m o n k’s second q ue stion is m ore in te re s tin g . W hat
s h a ll w e do w hen w e get to heaven? W h a t do w e do
a fte r w e h ave seen in to o u r n atu re ? S6zan’s answ er
is th a t w e ju s t re jo ic e w ith those th a t re jo ic e , and weep
w ith those th a t w eep, as a d ru n k e n m an does, n o t
d is c rim in a tin g frie n d s and foes, m en and w om en, gods
and g o b lin s. In S u fi m y s tic is m w e get th e same th in g .
A fte r years o f th e m ost te rrib le asceticism , th e adept
w ill th e n liv e on cushions and c a via r, p h y s ic a lly as
w e ll as s p iritu a lly . I th in k th is is w ro n g . The B o d h i-
s a ttiv a id e a l is th a t he sh o u ld g iv e up P aradise to liv e
w ith us m o rta ls in o u r w a n t and woe.
Sozan, h e a rin g th e vo ice o f th e b e ll, c rie d o ut, <4A y a !
A y a ! A y a !’’ A m o n k asked, “ W h a t’s th e m a tte r w ith
yo u? ” Sdzan said, “ I t s trik e s on m y h e a rt!”
T h o rea u w rite s in h is J o u rn a l, 1841:
I h e a r a m an b lo w in g a h o rn th is s till evening, and

i t sounds lik e th e p la in t o f n a tu re in these tim es. In
th is , w h ic h I re fe r to some m an, th e re is som ething
g re a te r th a n any m an.
A m o n k said to S6zan, “ C la sp in g th e ja d e to m y
bosom , I th ro w m y s e lf upon you, and ask y o u to p o lish
i t ! ” S6zan said, “ I w o n ，t ! ” T he m o n k asked, ‘"W hy
p o t? ” S6zan said, “ I w o u ld have yo u k n o w th a t S6zan
is v e ry s k ilf u l!’’
Kyuho 107
T his co n ve rsa tio n re fe rs to th e episode o f B enka.1

The m on k asks Sozan to save h im . S6zan answ ers, “ I
am n o t fo o lis h enough to th in k I, o r anyone else, can
be a sa v io u r o f m en. I am c le v e r enough to k n o w th a t
I can’t teach y o u a n y th in g . A n d don’t yo u k n o w th a t
C h ris t has d ie d fo r y o u and A m id a liv e s fo r yo u, and
th a t yo u are a lre a d y saved, ju s t as y o u are?”
A m onk asked Sozan w h a t was th e h o lie s t th in g in
the w o rld . Sozan answ ered, UA dead cat is th e m ost
sacred o f a ll th in g s .” “ In w h a t w a y? ” asked th e m onk.
“ Because to people i t is in v a lu a b le ,” answ ered S6zan.
In v a lu a b le , valueless, beyond v a lu e . A rt, p o e try ,
re lig io n are useless. A s illy com m ent is perhaps th e
best o f a ll. F u rth e r, w h a t people ju d g e as good is u su a l
ly w orth le ss, so th e re ve rse applies.
A m onk asked S6zan, “ W h a t is im m o rta l? ” The
answ er was, “ A w ith e re d tre e .” T hen he asked, “ W h a t
is a Zen teacher?” S6zan answ ered, “ Som eone w ho
needs no h e lp .” A n o th e r m on k re p o rte d th is conversa
tio n to K y u h o (C iu fe n g ) jiM ：,12w h o com m ented, ^T hree
subordinates, s ix fo rm s .”
“ T hree su b o rd in a te s” m eans th a t a w om an m u st obey
her fa th e r, th e n h e r husband, th e n h e r son. “ S ix fo rm s ”
are th e s ix k in d s o f C hinese verse. K y u h o says th a t
S6zan’s answ ers w e re as sm ooth and accom m odating
as a C hinese d a u g h te r, b rid e , and m o th e r w as supposed
to be th ro u g h o u t h e r life , and in te re s tin g lik e th e d if
fe re n t v a rie tie s o f C hinese p o e try . I m y s e lf have as little
a d m ira tio n fo r S6zan’s answ ers as I have fo r a w om an
w ho obeys m en, o r fo r C hinese poetics.
A m onk asked S6zan, “ W ho seizes th e sw ord in th e
w hole c o u n try ? ” S6zan answ ered, “ S6zan.” The m on k
asked, ‘*W hom are y o u g oing to k ill? ” “ J u s t e v e ry -
body,” said Sozan. “ Suppose yo u sh ou ld m eet th e
m oth er and fa th e r w ho gave b ir th to yo u ? >, “ W hy
1. Pienho; see page 55.

2. A disciple o f Sekiso.
108 Sozan and Ungo
p a rtic u la ris e ?y* said S6zan. “ H ow abo ut y o u rs e lf? ”

asked th e m onk. “ W ho is going to do w h a t to m e?”
said Sozan. “ W h y n o t k ill y o u rs e lf? ” S6zan re p lie d ,
“ T he re no place fo r m y hand to do so.”
A m an m ust be th e m aster. H e m u st say, as B uddha
is supposed to have said a t h is b irth , “ B etw een Heaven
and E a rth , I a lone am th e H on ou red O n e !’’ T he odd
th in g is th a t a m an can and m u st dispose o f a ll others,
even those nearest and dearest, and e sp e cia lly those,
b u t he cannot get r id o f h im s e lf, fo r o n ly h im s e lf is
n o t b o rn , and ca nn ot die.
K y6 ge n (H s ia n g y g n )香厳，（ o f th e N angaku b ranch)
was asked b y a m onk, <4W h a t is th e W ay?w H e an
sw ered, dra go n sin g in g in a w ith e re d tre e .^ The
m onk said, “ I don’t k n o w w h a t yo u a re ta lk in g about.”
K y6 ge n said, “ The p u p ils o f th e eyes o f a s k u ll.” A fte r
w ards, a n o th e r m o n k asked Sekiso, **W hat is th is ^dragon
s in g in g in a w ith e re d tre e ’？” Sekisd said, “ I t is being
inve ste d w ith jo y •” T he m o n k th en asked, “ W h a t is
th is ‘p u p ils o f a s k u ll’？” Sekis6 said, “ I t is th e garm ent
o f w isdo m .” A g a in a m on k asked Sozan w h a t the
dragon s in g in g in th e w ith e re d tre e m eant, and he an
sw ered, <4The ptdse does n o t stop,^ and to th e question
w h a t th e p u p ils o f th e s k u ll s ig n ifie d he answ ered, “ N ot
q u ite d ry .” T he m o n k asked, “ Is th e re anyone w ho can
hear th e d ragon sin g in g ? ” Sozan re p lie d , <4In a ll the
w id e w o rld th e re is n o t a sin g le person w ho does n o t
h ea r i t !’’ T he m o n k asked w hose w ords th e y w ere.
S6zan said, “ I don’t know, but w hoever hears them w ill
lose h is life .” Sozan composed a verse:
The dragon in th e w ith e re d tre e re a lly sees th e W ay;

T he eyes o f th e s k u ll above a ll becom e clea r.
K n ow le dg e reaches its lim it, and th e re is n o th in g to
say;
W ho can d is tin g u is h th e p u re a m id st th e im p ure ?
Jesus said he was th e W ay. H e also sang fro m a

w ith e re d tree . B u t i t was n o t a song o f jo y , b u t re
The Song of the Dragon 109
sig n a tio n . T he song o f th e d ra go n is th e w in d b lo w in g

th ro u g h th e dead branches and b rin g in g o u t th e life
th a t is u n e x p e c te d ly in them . T here is in v o lv e d here
th e c o n tra s t betw een th e past, q u ie tn e s s ,正， o f th e
w ith e re d tre e , and th e present, m o v e m e n t,偏，o f the
dragon’s song. T he tw o a re m u tu a lly re la te d ,回互• The
eyes o f th e s k u ll have a s im ila r m eaning (n o t sym b o l
is m ). In th e M id d le Ages, as in a n cie n t E g y p t, a s k u ll
was k e p t on th e ta b le , e sp e cia lly d u rin g banquets, to
re m in d people o f death. T he eyes o f th e s k u ll w e re
fixe d u n w a v e rin g ly on those pre sen t. B u t th e Zen
w isdom is n o t th a t o f th e rem em bra nce o f death, b u t o f
the oneness o f dea th and life , going and com ing. S6zan’s
answ er, “ T he p ulse does n o t stop,” m eans th a t th e re a l
se lf neve r dies, because i t is n o t b o m . “ N o t q u ite d ry ”
has th e same m eaning. W a te r is n o t e n tire ly w e t (th e re
is a ir in it ) . R ock is n o t e n tire ly d ry . N o th in g is
e n tire ly dead， “ fo r u n til H im a ll liv e .” N o th in g is
e n tire ly liv in g ; p e rfe c tio n o f b e in g is a s ta tic c o n d i
tio n . Sozan says th a t e veryone hears th e dra go n sing.
Though th e y m ay n o t u n d e rsta n d it, i t is <<rThe fo u n ta in -
lig h t o f a ll th e ir seeing.,> In so fa r as th e y liv e a t a ll,
th e y liv e b y it. “ Lose h is life ” th u s m eans “ lose h is
death.” W hen w e h e a r th e M a tth e w Passion w e d ie
w ith C h ris t (a n d are re s u rre c te d w ith h im ). T he
verse, lik e a lm o st a ll Zen verses, is tr iv ia l, re p e titiv e ,
u n p o e tica lj and u n -Z e n -lik e .
U ngo (Y iin g u ) S ® , was th e c h ie f d is c ip le o f Tozan
(o r D oza n). H e to o k o rd e rs a t th e age o f tw e n ty fiv e .
W hen he firs t m e t Tozan, he w as asked, **W hat is y o u r
nam e?” H e answ ered, “ D 6yd” （ T a o y in g )道膺 • T6zan
said, “ T e ll m e tra n s c e n d e n ta lly !’’ U ngo re p lie d ,
“ S peaking tra n s c e n d e n ta lly , m y nam e is D 6y6 .” Tozan
said, ‘*W hen I saw U ngan, m y answ er w as no d iffe re n t.”
Ungo rem ain ed w ith Tozan m a n y years. H e n e ve r had
less th a n one thousand fiv e h u n d re d d iscip le s, o f w ho m
tw e n ty e ig h t w e re e n lig h te n e d . H e d ie d in 902.
Tozan said to U ngo, MA n ic c h a n tik a , w h o k ills h is
110 Sozan and Ungo
fa th e r and m o th e r, causes b lo o d to flo w fro m th e body

o f a B uddha, breaks th e h a rm o n y o f th e co n g re g a tio n o f
m onks,— h ow does he in a ny w a y d isch arg e h is filia l
d utie s? ” U ngo answ ered, uB y so d o in g he firs t d is
charges h is filia l d u tie s .,> F ro m th is tim e , Tozan made
U ngo th e head o f h is room .
T he bad m an is la c k in g in good acts; he is fre e o f
goodness. So is th e (re a lly ) good m an. O rd in a ry
people e x p la in th e Zen te ach ing , th a t w e m u st k ill the
B uddha, k ill th e p a tria rc h s , sa yin g, “ O f course, w e are
n o t to do such te rrib le th in g s , b u t___ ’’ T h is is n o t so.
To k ill a B u dd h a o r a P a tria rc h s p iritu a lly is m uch
m ore te rrib le th a n to k ill h im p h y s ic a lly , and indeed
m ay re s u lt in th e la tte r, since to re fu se to be ta u g h t
is to sta rve th e teacher. P e rsecu tion , e xcom m u nica tion ,
th e In q u is itio n ,— w h a t is i t a ll b u t th e Buddhas and
P a tria rc h s d e fe n d in g th e ir (p h y s ic a l) bread and b u tte r
b y th e to rtu re and d eath o f those w ho a tta c k it?
A n o ffic ia l said to U ngo: “ T he W o rld -h o n o u re d One
had a secret message; M ahakasyapa d id n o t keep i t a
secret; w h a t is th is secret w o rd o f B uddha?” Ungo
ca lle d to h im , “ Y o u r h o n o u r !’’ H e answ ered, “ Yes?”
U ngo said, “ Y o u u n d e rsta n d ? ” “ N o,” he re p lie d . Ungo
said, “ I f yo u don’t u n d e rsta n d , th a t is B u dd h a ’s secret
w o rd ; i f yo u do, th a t is M ahakasyapa’s n o t ke eping it
a secret.”
T he p o in t o f th is s to ry is n o t U ngo’s c le v e r answ er
a t th e end, b u t h is c a llin g to th e o ffic ia l, and h is respond
in g . W hen th e u n iv e rs e asks us a q uestion, w e (m u st)
answ er. T h is is a k in d o f Zen, and in th is sense, Zen
is s im p ly e v e ry th in g th a t happens. H ow e ver, besides
th is in s tin c tiv e , “ n a tu ra l,” in e v ita b le Zen, th e re is a Zen
w h ic h U ngo is try in g to re v e a l to th e o ffic ia l, th e con
scious, w ille d , e v ita b le , s u p e r-n a tu ra l Zen, th a t chooses
as i t responds, u n p re d ic ta b le and fre e .
A m on k asked U ngo, “ W ho is th e te ach er o f a ll the
B uddhas?” U ngo said “ K w a tz !” and added, “ Y o u c a rt
p u llin g b u m p k in , 田庫奴！
” T he m o n k m ade h is bows.
Soy 111
<4H ow do y o u u n d e rsta n d it? ” asked U ngo. T he m o n k

said “ K w a tz !，，and added, “ Y o u o ld a b b o t!” U ngo said,
“ F u n d a m e n ta lly , I d on’t u n d e rs ta n d !” T he m o n k
danced a ro u n d and w e n t o ff. U ngo e xcla im e d, beg
gar h a n g in g ro u n d th e fo o d -ta b le V1
The te ach er o f a ll th e B uddhas is th e ir o w n B u dd h a
natu re , b u t w e do n o t re a lly k n o w th is fa c t u n til o u r
ow n B uddha n a tu re teaches i t to us. I t is o f course
alw ays te a ch in g us. The th in g s a ro u n d us do n o th in g
else. B u t b e in g ca lle d , and a nsw ering , is a re m a rk a b ly
clea r, and a t th e same tim e p ro fo u n d e xam ple o f th e
w ay in w h ic h th in g s a re separate and y e t co nte rm ino us.
The m on k asked a q ue stion . U ngo said, uY o u are a
fo o l V9 T he m on k said, “ So a re y o u !” （ so is e ve ryb o d y,
so is e v e ry th in g ) • “ W h a t is th e m eaning o f ‘fo o l’?” asked
U ngo. T h e m o n k danced. (E v e ry th in g dances; th e
universe is a d a n c e ). O ff he w e n t, and U ngo p ra ise d h im ,
in h is absence, sa yin g, “ A fte r a ll, e ve ryb o d y is o u t to
get som ething, th o u g h o f course Zen g e ttin g is a n o -
g e ttin g .”
Ungo asked T6zan, ‘W h a t is th e m ea nin g o f D a ru m a ’s
com ing fro m th e W est?” T6zan said, “ In a fte r tim es,
you w ill fe e l lik e p u ttin g s tra w o v e r y o u r head ! S up
pose someone asks y o u th e q ue stion , h o w w o u ld i t be?71
“ I was w ro n g ,” said U ngo.
Zen m eans b e in g asham ed, re s o lu te ly , w he n y o u have
done som e thin g w ro n g . Zen m eans fe e lin g pleased, re
s o lu te ly , w h e n y o u a re p ra ise d . A s H a m le t a lm o st said,
“ The resoluteness ic a ll.”
U ngo was m ix in g soy. W hen Tozan asked h im , w h a t
he was d o in g , he said, “ M ix in g soy.” T6zan said, “ Y o u
are u sin g a c e rta in q u a n tity o f sa lt? ” U ngo said, “ Yes,
I ’m p u ttin g some in .” Tozan said, “ I t ’s g o t a fin e
fla v o u r? ” U ngo re p lie d , “ I t has.”
W e u n d e rsta n d th is co n ve rsa tio n w he n w e rem em be r
how th e 5 th P a tria rc h asked th e 6th, “ Is th e ric e re a d y? ”
and Eno answ ered, uR eady a lo n g tim e ago; o n ly w a it
in g fo r th e sieve.,> T he “ ric e ” is E nd’s u n d e rs ta n d in g
112 Sozan and TJngo
of Zen, which only required th e “sieve” of K 6 n in ’s
a p p ro b a tio n . I n th e case o f U ngo and T6zan, th e soy，
w h ic h is m ade fro m a m ix tu re o f b a rle y , beans, and
sa lt, is again th e v a rio u s elem ents th a t com e to g e th e r
to m ake up th e s im p le non-substance, Zen. One m ore
que stion m ay be asked. W h y sh ou ld Zen, w h ic h is “ a
d ire c t p o in tin g to th e re a l h e a rt o f m an， ’’ use in d ire c t
ness? T he answ er m u s t be th e same as in th e case o f
p o e try ; th a t p o e try , lik e Zen, n e ve r uses sym bols, (fo r
one th in g ca n n o t m ean a n o th e r th in g ) b u t d e lig h ts to
p o in t o u t th e sameness u n d e rly in g d iffe re n c e (and the
d iffe re n c e u n d e rly in g sameness) th e m a k in g o f good soy
and th e m a k in g o f a re a l m an b eing b o th th e same as
and d iffe re n t fro m each o th e r.
A m on k fro m S illa said to U ngo, “ I have som ething I
ju s t can’t say !” U ngo said, “ H ow can i t be d iffic u lt
to say?” T he m o n k said, “ T hen w o n ’t yo u please ex
press i t fo r m e?” U ngo crie d , “ S illa ! S illa !” A
te ach er o f th e O ry u S chool8 said, uU ngo w ishe d to see
th e m o n k fro m S illa , b u t he w as oceans aw ay fro m h im .>,
T he K o re a n m o n k had ju s t becom e e nlig h te n e d , and
w a n te d someone to express th e jo y he fe lt. T h is shows
th a t h is e n lig h te n m e n t was s till h a lf-b a k e d . A n d in a
v e ry c h a ra c te ris tic a lly K o re a n w a y he g o t U ngo to do
fo r h im w h a t he sh ou ld have done fo r h im s e lf. W hen
U ngo said, “ K o re a ! K o re a V9 he was expressing the
m o n k’s (unconscious) d e sire to ta k e hom e to h is coun
try m e n w h a t he had re ce ive d fro m C hina. The O ryu
S chool teacher seems to o b je c t to th is too hum an u n d e r
sta n d in g o f th e m o n k ’s sta te o f m in d , and w o u ld say
perhaps th a t th e m o n k w as a lre a d y hom e, was home
fo r th e fir s t tim e , and th a t U ngo sh ou ld have cried,
“ H u rra h ! H om e a t la s t!’’ o r, m ore v io le n tly , “ To h e ll
w ith K o rea , and th is dam ned C hin a too !” 3
3. One of the Seven Schools of Zen, it was founded by Enan

(Huinan) 慧南，1002-1069， a master of the Hinzai School. The oryil,
黄龍， and the Ydgi，福岐• were added to the original five.
Breeches 113
One d ay U ngo had some breeches ta ke n to a m on k

w ho liv e d in a h e rm ita g e , b u t th e m o n k refu sed th em ,
saying, “ T he w om an w ho b ore m e gave m e some
breeches.” U ngo had a message ta k e n to th e m o n k ask
ing , 4<W h a t d id y o u w e a r b e fo re y o u r m o th e r b o re yo u ? >,
The m o n k sent b ack no answ er. A fte rw a rd s , w h e n th e
m onk d ie d, and w as crem ated, s a rira w e re fo u n d , w h ic h
w ere b ro u g h t to U ngo and show n to h im . U ngo d e c la r
ed, uE ven i f a c a rtlo a d 4 (o f s a rira ) had been fo u n d , i t
w o u ld be n o th in g com pared w ith th e answ er to m y
q u e s tio n !”
Zen re q u ire s a c e rta in o b stin a cy, as w e ll o f course
as re silie n ce . B o th U ngo and th e m o n k p e rsiste d in
th e ir ow n a c tiv ity . U ngo had th e la s t w o rd , i t is tru e ,
b u t th e n th e m o n k w as dead and th e h o ly re lic s fo u n d
in h is ashes co u ld be r ig h tly dism issed as a p ious su pe r
s titio n . T he m o n k re fu se d U ngo's c h a rity . H e w as b o rn
w ith h is m o th e r-g iv e n fle s h ly co v e rin g on h is shanks,
and th a t was enough. H e d id n o t w is h to be w arm ed
w ith U ngo’s b ro th e rly lo ve . U ngo had h is revenge b y
asking an u na nsw era ble q ue stion , and w h e n th e m o n k
was dead pooh-poohed h is re lic s and said th a t th e m o n k
should have answ ered h im , fo rg e ttin g th a t silen ce is
also an answ er, and d eath th e a nsw er to a ll questions.
A m on k asked U ngo, “ M o u n ta in s and riv e rs , th e g re a t
e arth,— w h e re does i t a ll come fro m ? ” “ F ro m d e lu s iv e
im a g in a tio n ,M said U ngo. T he m o n k said, “ W on’t yo u
please im a g in e a piece o f g o ld fo r m e?” U ngo gave
up; th e m o n k w as n o t re je c te d .
The C hinese com m on sense sees th ro u g h th e In d ia n
so p h istica tio n . M ost is im a g in e d , m uch fo o lis h ly , b u t
some th in g s , lik e m o u n ta in s and riv e rs and pieces o f
gold, a re th e re , o r n o t.
4. Literally, “ 8 hu and 4 tou.”

Chapter X V
UMMON I
I f w e ju d g e o f th e w o rth o f a Zen m aster b y th e n um

b e r o f anecdotes to ld o f h im , fo r th is reason also U m m on
(Y iin m e n ) 雲P5, w ill to p th e lis t, w ith n e a rly tw o h u n
d re d in Zenm on K 6 an T aise i. U m m on was c le v e r fro m
a c h ild . W hen he re a lise d th e idea o f th e O baku Sect,
he cam e to see B o k u jii (M u c h o u )睦州，a d is c ip le o f
R in za i. U m m on kn ocke d a t th e gate, and B o k u ju asked,
“ W ho is it? ” “ B u n -e n (W e n y e n ).’’ “ W h a t is i t you
w a n t? ” UI w a n t to u n d e rsta n d m y s e lf. Please teach
m e !” B o k u ju opened th e gate, glanced a t h im and shut
i t again. T h is w e n t on fo r th re e days, b u t on th e th ird
day, w hen th e doo r opened, U m m on pushed h is w ay
in . B o k u ju seized h im and said, uSay som ething ! Say
s o m e th in g !’’ U m m on d id n ’t k n o w w h a t to do, and
B o k u ju , c a llin g h im , 4<Y o u b ig g im le t,,n pushed h im out.
A s he h u rrie d ly sh u t th e gate, U m m on’s le g was caught
in i t and b ro ke n . W ith th e in te n se p a in , U m m on groan
ed, and cam e to a re a lis a tio n su dd en ly.12
L a te r, U m m on liv e d in K 6 ta i T em p le 光泰院，a t M ou nt
U m m on, fro m w h ic h he to o k h is nam e, d y in g in 949,
b u t a t w h a t age is n o t kn o w n . I t is said th a t h is en
lig h te n e d d iscip le s num bered s ix ty one. U m m on was
as sharp as an (E n g lis h ) g im le t, and th is b rin g s out
th e fa c t th a t Zen, w h ic h professes to despise and eschew
in te lle c t, is also dependent on i t fo r its h ig h e st exposi
1. It is said that when one of the Emperors built a huge castle,

a large clumsy gimlet was used, but could not be employed after
wards, and so the word *'gimletM is used in exactly the opposite way
to the English.
2. Ummon no doubt thought enlightenment worth a broken leg,
but what shall we say of Bokuju's Zen clumsiness?
A dried shit-stick 115
tio n and p ra c tic e . U m m on is p a rtic u la rly fam ous fo r a

o n e -s y lla b le Zen, one (C h ine se) w o rd in answ er to
a question h o w e ve r le n g th y . A m o n k asked U m m on,
“ W h a t is th e B u dd h a? ” U m m on re p lie d , “ A d rie d s h it-
s tic k .”
T his fo rm s th e 21st Case o f th e M v m o n k a n . Pieces
o f w ood w e re used as to ile t p ap er in C hin a. W hen th e
su pp ly o f new ones ra n o u t, p eo ple w o u ld p ic k up used
old d ry ones, th u s in cre a sin g in fe c tio u s diseases, and
b y n a tu ra l se le ctio n m a k in g th e C hinese a disease-
re sista n t race. I t w o u ld have been m o re s c ie n tific ,
though less p o e tic, i f U m m on had said th a t th e B u d
dha, th a t is, m an, is th e s h it on th e s tic k . B u t U m m on’s
in te n tio n is a lit t le m o re co m p lica te d . H e w a n ts to
pou r s h it on Das H e ilig e fo r one th in g , b u t he does n o t
w ish to say a n y th in g p a n th e is tic o r p a n h u m a n istic. He
wishes th e q u e stio n e r to be sa tisfie d w ith h is que stion .
T h a t is th e a rt o f liv in g in th is w o rld .
S h ou ld th e sun and m oon n o t d o u b t,

W e co u ld n e v e r th in k th in g s o u t.
A m on k asked U m m on “ W h a t is i t th a t surpasses th e
Buddhas, surpasses th e P a tria rc h s ? ” U m m on re p lie d ,
“ Buns.”
The B uddhas and th e P a tria rc h s a re th in g s o f th e
m in d, ju s t lik e generals and p rim e m in is te rs and p o lic e
men, b u t buns are re a l, buns a re earne st; th e y have a
s im p lic ity , a p e rfe c tio n o f b e in g w h ic h no m an can
a tta in to . Jesus ta u g h t us to p ra y fo r o u r d a ily buns.
They are also th e s p iritu a l B o d y o f C h ris t, b ro k e n fo r
us. A b ove a ll, buns a re so m e thin g w h ic h B uddhas and
gods and sages a re n o t (e x c e p t u n in te n tio n a lly ); th e y
are hum orous.
A m on k asked U m m on, “ W h a t is th e p la ce w h e re a ll
th e B uddhas m a n ife s t them selves?” U m m on said, “ T he
E astern M o u n ta in flo w s o ve r th e w a te r.”
The Zen m asters h ave to m ake th e ir d iscip le s a n ti
in te lle c tu a l and m a te ria lis tic , y e t tra n sce n d e n ta l. T h a t
116 Ummon
buns are better than Buddhas was taught in the anecdote

before. In this one, mountains move. Faith, as Christ
said, moves them. Buns evaporate into thin air, un-
biteable.
U m m on said, “ Do yo u w a n t to k n o w th e p a tria rc h s ? ”
P o in tin g w ith h is s ta ff, he said, “ T he p a tria rc h s a re a ll
o v e r y o u r heads, d a n cin g about. I f y o u w a n t to kn o w
th e eyes o f th e p a tria rc h s , th e y a re a ll u n d e r y o u r fe e t.J,
T hen he w e n t on, “ Y o u g iv e th e h u n g ry s p irits tea and
ric e , b u t th e y are n o t sa tia te d .”
The Bible says, “God is love.” This is all right, but
it should have said, with Tolstoy, “Love is God.” Love
of the earth, love of the sky, that is enough. Picking
out this, and choosing that for love, it is an eternal task
to please these half-gods. Whatever it is, take it, for
God offers it, God offers himself in it, God is your taking
it.
A monk asked Ummon, “What is the meaning of
Daruma’s coming from the West?” Ummon said, “We
see the mountains in the sun.”
“Daruma’s coming from the West” means the coming
into the world of Zen. Zen is the (proper) seeing of
the mountains bathed in sunshine.
A monk asked Ummon, “How was it before Gozu saw
the 4th Patriarch?”8 “Kanzeon in each house.” “How
about after he saw him?” “A tiger eating a centipede
in the fire.”
Before we understand Zen we think of peace of
mind, Buddhist compassion, Wordsworth’s quiet eye,
gentle Jesus, meek and mild. After we understand
it, it is as Ummon says: “I am not come to bring
peace, but a sword.” “The Lord God is a man of War.”
A monk said to Ummon, “What is it, Buddha，s teach
ing periods in his life-time?” Ummon replied, “Against,
one, explanation.”
Chigi (C h ii) 智顗， 538-597, founder of the Tendai
3. See page 11.
The Nirvana Virtues 117
School in C hina, stated th a t th e re w e re fiv e perio d s in

th e B u dd h a ’s te a c h in g ,五時八敎， 4 co rre sp o n d in g to th e
Kegon, A gon, H oto, H annya, and H o k k e S utras. T he
“ against, one, e x p la n a tio n ,” m ig h t m ean e x p la n a tio n o f
th e One, o r, one e x p la n a tio n opposing, o r, a bo ut one
e xp la n a tio n . The m o n k was p ro b a b ly a T en da i m onk,
and w an te d to ask abo ut th e d e ve lo p m e n t o f B u dd h ism ,
th e g ra d u a l re v e la tio n o f tru th . Zen has m a in ta in e d ,
w ith a correctness th a t is p ro b a b ly u n h is to ric a l, th a t
tru th kn ow s no increase o r decrease, and has th e im
m o rta lity o f th e b e a u ty o f C leo pa tra. U m m on’s w o rd s
have n o t a d ic tio n a ry m eaning, b u t p o in t to th e
absolute, th e tim eless and placeless. T h is anecdote
fo rm s th e 14th Case o f th e H e k ig a n ro k u ; th e in te r
p re ta tio n is E n g o ^.
U m m on asked th e head m onk, 4<W h a t s u tra a re y o u
le c tu rin g on?” “ T he N irv a n a S u tra .” “ The N irv a n a
S u tra has th e F o u r N irv a n a V irtu e s , hasn’t it? ” “It
has.” U m m on asked, p ic k in g up a cup, “ H o w m a n y
v irtu e s has th is ? ” “ N one a t a ll/ ’ said th e m on k. “ B u t
ancien t people said i t had, d id n ’t th e y ? ” said U m m on.
“ W hat do yo u th in k o f w h a t th e y said?” U m m on s tru c k
th e cup and asked, “ Y o u u n d e rsta n d ? ” “ N o,” said th e
m onk. “ T he n,” said U m m on, “ Y o u ’d b e tte r go on w ith
y o u r le ctu re s on th e s u tra .”
The F o u r N irv a n a V irtu e s are 1 . 常，im m u ta b ility ; 2.
楽，jo y ; 3• 我，p e rso n a l existen ce; 4• 浄，p u rity . These
fo u r v irtu e s b elon g o n ly to th e tra n s c e n d e n ta l re a lm ,
fro m w h ic h such th in g s as cups a re exclu de d. W e have
here th e p ro b le m o f va lu e , o r va lu es, w h ic h , a ccordin g
to one E uropean school are fo u r, re lig io u s , m o ra l
aesthetic, and in te lle c tu a l. U m m on believes in one o n ly ,
and pra ctises it, e x is te n c e -v a lu e . The e xisten ce v a lu e o f
each th in g is in fin ite , and th e re fo re e qu al to th a t o f
e very o th e r th in g . T hus a cup o r a s u tra a re “ in d if
fe re n t m odes o f th e D iv in e B e in g .” E ven in C h ris tia n
4. Five periods, and eight kinds of doctrine.

118 Ummon
ity there was the Holy Grail. But, as Wordsworth

stated, and proved by examples, value is more accessible
in the ordinary, common things of everyday life. So
Ummon uses a cup to preach with; his hymn of praise
is the note the cup sends out when it is struck.
A m on k asked U m m on，“ H o w a bo ut w he n th e w o rd
is u tte re d th a t expresses a ll th in g s ? ” U m m on said,
“ T e a rin g d o w n ，b re a k in g up !”
These enigmatic laconisms are not mere encourage
ments to a state of non-thought. They are exact replies
to exact questions. These questions all boil down to,
what is the state, what is the activity of Zen? The
answer is that morality, beauty, truth, Christ, Buddha,
the M a tth ew Passion, the C om m ed ia , justice, the soul
and its immortality or annihilation,—all disappear. If
Ummon were living today and were asked “What is
Zen?” he might answer, “Ten thousand million atomic
bombs !’’ but would not mean that this is a spiritually
disruptive force which will bring about a betterment of
some kind. He would mean that Zen enables us to
see things as they are, as they are becoming, without
any judgement as to improvement or deterioration, or
rather, seeing and being things as they are becoming
is God, is Zen. All values are torn up, all standards
are broken down.
A monk asked Ummon, “What is the Dharmakaya?”
Ummon answered, “The Six can’t get hold of it.”
-T h e Dharmakaya，法身， is the first of The Trikaya
二身， The Three-fold Body of Buddha, the other two be
ing The Sambhogakaya，報身， and The Nirmanakaya, 化
身 • The Dharmakaya is the essential nature of Buddha.
The second is the Body of Bliss, which he uses for
enjoyment; and the third the body of transformation
by which he reveals himself. The Dharmakaya is the
highest, the most spiritual of all, and the monk wants
to know what it is, and what it is like. Ummon an
swers that none of the Six can apprehend it. There
are many sixes in Buddhist theology, for example the
The Temple Post 119
Six R o o ts ,六根，eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, m in d ; th e
S ix S e nse s,六依，S ix E n tra n c e s ,六入，S ix F ie ld s ,六境，
S ix M is le a d e rs ,六妄；th e re are also th e S ix F e rrie s ,
六度， c h a rity , ke e p in g th e com m andm ents, patience,
zeal, m e d ita tio n , w isd o m ; S ix W isd qm s,六慧，S ix M a g ica l
P o w e rs ,六神通• N one o f these can enable us to a tta in
to B uddhahood. The re la tiv e can b y no m eans becom e
th e absolute. “ Eye h a th n o t seen, n o r ear h e a rd ___ ’’
Ju st as e v e ry th in g else in th e w o rld is m ira c le , so is
o ur s a lv a tio n , w h e th e r b o rn o r a cqu ire d.
A m onk: said to U m m on， “ W h a t is P u re T ru th ? ”
U m m on answ ered, “ A flo w e r-b e d .” T he m on k w e n t
on, “ A n d w he n i t is d iffe re n t fro m th is ? ” “ A g o ld e n -
h a ire d lio n ,” U m m o n re p lie d .
“ P u re ” m eans “ beyond p u r ity and im p u rity ,” beyond
tru th and e rro r. F lo w e rs g ro w in g u n d e r th e hedge in
a ll th e ir w ild p ro fu s io n , b o rn to b lu s h unseen and w aste
th e ir sweetness on th e d esert a ir— these are, n o t sym bols
o f n a tu re , b u t n a tu re its e lf, p u re n a tu re . B u t th is is a
som ew hat passive fo rm o f N a tu re . T he re is a m ore
active, lo rd ly aspect, th e K in g o f Beasts w ith h is y e llo w
m ane b ris tlin g , m on arch o f a ll he surveys.
A m o n k asked U m m on, “ W h a t m an on e a rth can
understand B u d d h ism ? ” U m m on answ ered, 4<T he o u t
side post o f th e te m p le can u n d e rsta n d i t Vy and w ith
a “ K w a tz !” added, “ Y o u dead to a d !”
T his is w h a t H e rb e rt m eans w he n he says,
A fe a th e r o r a s h e ll
T he best o f us excel.
T his c a llin g th e m o n k a to ad is p ra is in g h im too h ig h ly ,

and b e littlin g th e toad.
The fo llo w in g is a c o n tin u a tio n o r c o ro lla ry o f th e
preceding. U m m on said, “ A ll yo u m onks roa m about
a ll o ver th e e a rth on Z en p ilg rim a g e s , b u t yo u don’t
kn o w th e m ea nin g o f D a ru m a ^ com ing fro m th e W est.
The o u tsid e p ost kn ow s i t a ll rig h t. W h y don’t yo u
som ehow fin d o u t th e p ost’s kn o w le d g e o f th a t m ean-
Chrysanthemums, by Sengai
T h is is a 31 s y lla b le w aka in tw o p a rts,

17 and 14:
此花 S :含 < 〜 t 耳屯紅 U
、阿 !）t 办屯甘f
T h is flo w e r is ca lle d
[C h rysa n th e ] m um ,
Because i t has no m o u th .
Y ou have leave to say i t has leaves,
B u t I w o u ld as lie f n o t b e lie ve i t
W h a t Sengai a c tu a lly says is th a t th e

flo w e r is ca lle d k ik u , c h ry s a n th e m u m ;
k ik u , 聞 < , m eans to h e a r] b u t it has no
ears. F u rth e r, th a t th o u g h it has leaves
[葉，h a ; h a , 齒，m eans te e th ] i t can’t eat.
T h is p la y in g w ith w ords, beloved o f Shakes
peare, L am b, T h o re a u , H ood, and th e pre sen t
w rite r, is y e t a n o th e r fo rm o f “ B y m ere
p la y in g go to th e H eaven.” “ L ife is re a l,
life is earne st,” and w o rd s are supposed to
be th e same. T h is is th e m is ta k e w h ic h
Zen desires to re c tify .
120 Ummon
ing? A n y w a y , I ’l l te ll yo u i t m y s e lf: n in e tim es nine

is e ig h ty one.”
W hen students asked me th e m eaning o f th e absolute,
asserting th a t a ll th in g s a re re la tiv e , I used to w rite
on th e bla ckbo od 2 x 2 = 4 , w h ic h o f course m ig h t n o t be
tru e , th a t is, absolute, in some o th e r w o rld , b u t w h a t
w e w a n t is som ething abso lu te in th is w o rld . Zen is
th e thusness o f th in g s , m a th e m a tic a l no less than
m a te ria l, m a te ria l no less th a n m e n ta l.
A m o n k asked U m m on, “ W h a t is th e pre cise m eaning
o f S 6kei?” U m m on said, “ T h is o ld m o n k lik e s anger,
lik e s jo y .” “ H ow is th is ? ” asked th e m on k. “ W hen you
m eet a sw ordsm an,” said U m m on, “ m eet h im w ith a
sw ord. D on’t o ffe r a poem to anyone b u t a poe t.”
“ S 6 kei” m eans En6, th e S ix th P a tria rc h , w ho liv e d
th e re . U m m on's fir s t answ er has lit t le d ire c t connec
tio n w ith Eno. Zen m eans lik in g w h a t yo u (re a lly )
lik e , w h a t y o u r (re a l) n a tu re lik e s , in U m m on’s case,
anger, th e sinew s o f th e soul, and jo y , its w ing s. He
rem ind s us o f N ietzsche, B la ke , and o f D .H . Law rence.
Then U m m on, as so o fte n , says th e opposite, o r ra th e r
th e obverse o f w h a t he said befo re . O u r re la tio n s w ith
others are governed b y th e ir n a tu re . W e are an echo,
the cham eleon poet, a ll th in g s to a ll m en, k illin g w ith
those w ho k ill, u n p o e tic a l w ith those w ho are u n -
p o e tica l. T h is is L a w re n c e ^ a m b iv a le n t, balanced a t
titu d e in re g a rd to lo ve . On th e one hand th e re is
(p o e try to th e p o e t) b u t on th e o th e r w e are
ourselves, m a in ta in in g th e in te g rity o f o u r ow n ego
and its expansion and g ro w th . So w ith flo w e rs, w e
a llo w th em th e ir life , b u t w e have th e rig h t to p lu c k
them (th is is th e anger and jo y ) i f and w hen w e w ish.
M eans are ends, and ends are m eans. T h is is the
te ach ing o f th e S ix th P a tria rc h .
A m on k asked U m m on, “ H ow can w e a vo id th e advent
o f life and death?” U m m on said, “ W here are you?”
F o r som ething to come to us, w e m ust be in a fixe d
place. I f w e are going to ru n aw ay, w e m u st ru n aw ay
Repentance 121
fro m som ew here. D .H . L a w re n ce says in K angaroo

th a t o u r tru e hom e is e te rn ity and now he re. I f th is
is so, n e ith e r life n o r d eath can reach us. ( I am
n o t sure th a t U m m on is q u ite rig h t, b u t th a t is w h a t
he s a y s ).
A m o n k said to U m m on, uI f a m an k ills h is fa th e r,
k ills h is m o th e r, he m ay re p e n t b e fo re th e B u dd h a. I f
he k ills th e B uddha, k ills a p a tria rc h , w h e re can he
rep en t? ” U m m on answ ered, “ Q u ite !’’
T h is is an e xam ple o f th e o n e -s y lla b le re p lie s fo r
w h ich U m m on is ju s tly fam ous. Ro ! (L u ! ) 露，m eans
“ expressed,” “ c le a r,” “ n o th in g h id d e n ,” and corresponds
v e ry w e ll to th e E n g lis h id io m a tic use o f “ Q u ite !”
W hat U m m on m eans is th a t th e q u e stio n is a v e ry good
one, th a t is, i t is rh e to ric a l. Such a m an has no place
to re p e n t, n o w h e re to re p e n t; he can’t re p e n t. W h a t
w e can’t do, w e sh o u ld n ’t do. A s T h o re a u says, “ N a tu re
neve r apologises.” Dogs fa w n , lik e m en, b u t a ca t ju s t
lic k s its e lf in th e c o rn e r w he n slapped.
One d ay U m m on, o pe ning th e gate, saw a m o n k com
ing , and im m e d ia te ly asked h im , <4W h a t w ill yo u do
w hen yo u are n o t liv in g fre e ly and spaciou sly? ” T he
m onk was s ile n t. U m m on said, “ Asfc m e !’’ and w he n
the m on k d id so, U m m on w a g g le d h is hands and c rie d ,
“ Come, come, o ld S h a k a m u n i!”
To keep h is d ig n ity is th e le a s t concern o f a tru e
teacher, w ho m u s t h ave m ore zeal th a n th e p u p il, and
a tta ck, n o t d efend. T he in te n se st d e v o tio n to , and th e
closest fa m ilia r ity w ith each and e v e ry th in g 一 th is is
w h a t U m m on is te a ch in g — is re a l liv in g .
A m o n k asked U m m on, “ W hen n o t a th o u g h t arises,
can th e re be a n y th in g w ro n g ? ” U m m on said, “ M o u n t
S u m e ru !”
M o u n t S u m eru is th e c e n tra l m o u n ta in o f e ve ry
w o rld . A t its to p is In d ra ’s heaven. B e lo w i t are th e
fo u r d evalokas, and a ro u n d i t e ig h t c irc le s o f m o u n ta in s
w ith th e e ig h t seas. U m m on does n o t a nsw er th e m o n k ’s
q ue stion ; he h im s e lf is th e q ue stion . “ N o t a th o u g h t
122 Ummon
a ris in g in m e, and I am in P aradise, th a t is, in th e

u n ive rse , liv in g on th e to p o f th e w o rld !”
A m o n k said to U m m on, “ W hen a ll m e n ta l a c tiv ity
is a t an end, h ow is it? ” U m m on said, “ B rin g the
B u d d h a -H a ll here, and w e ’l l w e ig h i t to g e th e r !” The
m o n k said, “ A re n ’t y o u g e ttin g a w a y fro m th e p o in t? ”
U m m on e xcla im e d, “ T o tsu !” （ T u ! ) ，and th e n said, “ Y ou
p lu n d e re r o f v a c u ity
“ F a ith can m ove m o u n ta in s ,” U m m on says, b u t the
m o n k is th in k in g in a b stra ctio n s, n o t c o n cre te ly. “ A
p lu n d e re r o f v a c u ity ,> m eans a m in d w ith o u t im a g in a
tio n , w ith o u t th e p o w e r to see b ig th in g s as sm a ll, to h o ld
in fin ity in th e p a lm o f th e hand. B u t, w e m u st re m in d
U m m on, w e ca nn ot im a g in e th in g s aw ay, o r n o n -e x is te n t
th in g s in to existence. A w a ll is a w a ll, n o t a door. Y ou
can’t eat n o th in g and liv e .
U m m on said to th e assem bled m onks, “ H e a rin g the
sound, p e rc e iv in g th e W a y; seeing th e c o lo u r, e n lig h te n
in g th e m in d . T he B o d h is a ttv a K anzeon b rin g s some
cash and buys some ric e cakes. L e ttin g th e m go, th ey
are seen to be d u m p lin g s .”
“ H e a rin g th e sound, p e rc e iv in g th e W a y,” re fe rs to
K y6 ge n (H s ia n g y e n )香嚴，w ho becam e e n lig h te n e d on
h e a rin g a stone s trik e a bam boo w h ile he was sweep
in g . “ Seeing th e co lo u r, e n lig h te n in g th e m in d ,” regards
R eiu n ( L in g y iin ) 霊雲，w ho cam e to a re a lis a tio n on
seeing th e flo w e rs o f a p lu m tre e . O n th e o th e r hand,
K a n n o n does a k in d o f c o n ju rin g tr ic k w ith cakes. The
m eaning is th a t as a re s u lt o f h e a rin g th e sound o f a
stone h ittin g a bam boo, o r seeing a blossom ing tree , w e
are able to p e rfo rm th e m ost o rd in a ry tasks in a
m ira c u lo u s w a y. H a te fu l th in g s becom e ch a rm in g ;
odious th in g s becom e in d iffe re n t; d u st becomes gold,
and g old becomes d ust,— a ll a t w ill, and fo r a fe w pence,
a fe w pensees.
A m o n k asked U m m on, wW h a t is y o u r tra d itio n a l w ay
of teaching Zen?” Ummon said, “Outside the gate there
are learners; tell them to come in !，
，
M oo! 123
T h is m eans th a t U m m on considered h im s e lf to be a
teacher, no m ore, no less.
T he same q u e stio n w ith a d iffe re n t answ er,— A m on k
asked, ‘*W hat is y o u r te a ch in g tra d itio n ? ” “ I t n e ve r
ra in s b u t i t p o u rs.” T he m o n k asked, “ W h a t do yo u
m ean, ‘L o n g ra in does n o t c le a r u p ’？’’ U m m on said, “ I t
d ries th e w aves.”
“ T h in g s n e ve r change,” says U m m on a t firs t. “ A ll
th in g s c o n tin u e as w he n o u r fa th e rs fe ll asleep.^ Then
he says th a t a ll is m ira c le , to p s y tu rv y , in co n se q u e n tia l,
a ta le to ld b y an id io t; th e lo n g ra in d rie s up th e w aves
o f th e sea.
A m on k asked, “ H o w a bo ut w he n th e w in d does n o t
pass th ro u g h th e se cre t room ?” “ I t tre m b le s in th e dew ,
and sounds in th e breeze,” re p lie d U m m on. “ H ow
about th e people in th a t ro o m ? ” U m m on said, “ I t ’s n o t
easy to ta lk o f th e same th in g tw ic e V9
“ T he w in d n o t passing th ro u g h th e secret ro o m ” means
th a t m aster and d is c ip le are in co m p le te u n io n and
u n a n im ity . I t is as n a tu ra l as th e dew on th e le a f, and
th e so ughing w in d . B u t i f w e go on end le ssly asking,
w hen th e q u e stio n has been answ ered once and fo r
a ll___
One day U m m on asked, “ H o w can w e m ake o u r
re lig io n p ro p e r? ” A n s w e rin g h im s e lf, he said, “ M oo !’’
T h is has perhaps tw o m eanings: firs t, w e can’t; second,
w e can, b u t o n ly b y p u re ly a n im a l m ethods. A cow
strengthens its lun gs, and a dve rtise s its cowness b y
m ooing. I t m oos its e lf in to b e in g a cow . N o m oo, no
cow ; no cow, no m oo, so th e c h ild re n r ig h tly c a ll i t
a m oo-cow . Zen m u st be th e same.
A m o n k asked U m m on, ‘*W hat are th e a c tiv itie s ,
行，o f a S ram ana,沙門？ U m m on answ ered, “ I have n o t
th e s lig h te s t id e a .” T he m o n k th e n said, ‘*W hy have n ’t
you a n y idea?” U m m on re p lie d , “ I ju s t w a n t to keep
m y n o -id e a .”
A sram ana is a m o n k, an e n lig h te n e d m on k. T he
S a n s k rit ro o t o f th e w o rd is sram , to m ake e ffo rts , to do
124 Ummon
a u s te ritie s . T h is m o n k ’s q ue stion is n o t so m uch “ W hat

s h a ll I do to be saved?” as “ W h a t does a m an do w hen
he is saved?” U m m on’s answ er m ay be in te rp re te d in
m any w ays. “ I kn o w , b u t I d on ’t w a n t to say.” “ I
re a lly don’t k n o w .” “ I w a n t to teach y o u n o t to kn o w .”
“ M y sta te o f m in d is beyond k n o w in g and n o t k n o w
in g .” “ Y o u are p e ste rin g m e !” ^P e rfe c t a ctio n is u n
conscious o f its e lf.” “ D on’t ask (fo o lis h ) q u e s tio n s !’’
A ll these to some e x te n t e n te r in to h is w is h n o t to fa ll
in to th e deadness o f k n o w in g som ething. A fte r w e
are e n lig h te n e d , w h a t s h a ll w e do? W e are in th e same
p o s itio n as th e saints in H eaven p la y in g on th e ir golden
harps ad nauseum .
A m on k asked U m m on, “ W h a t k in d o f m an is he w ho
has p e rfo rm e d th e suprem e a u s te ritie s ? ” U m m on said,
“ A tu b in th e hand !”
T h is answ er is in te n d e d to stop th e m o n k th in k in g
and ta lk in g abo ut C h ris t and B uddha, and come back
to re a l life .
A m on k said to U m m on, “ H o w abo ut a m an whose
p arents w o n ’t le t h im be a p rie s t? ” “ S h a llo w !” said
U m m on. “ I am n o t uneducated, b u t I don’t und ersta nd .”
“ Deep !” said U m m on.
W hen w e teach, w e teach ourselves. I f th e student
also understands som ething, th a t^ fin e , b u t i t is u n lik e ly .
“ S h a llo w ” m eans th e que stion is s h a llo w , and th e m an
w ho w ill n o t “ H ate fa th e r and m o th e r fo r m y sake” is
sh a llo w . “ D eep” m eans th a t to be tro u b le d about a
question is deep; n o t to k n o w is (p o te n tia lly ) deep.
Chapter X V I
UMMON II
A m on k asked U m m on，“ W h a t is fre e m u tu a l good

re la tio n s ? ” U m m on sa id ， “ D on ’t c a ll th a t sle e p in g -
place a s le e p in g -p la ce l" T he m o n k said, “ H ow abo ut
bad re la tio n s ? ” U m m on said, “ I t ’s a slee pin g p la c e !’’
“ To m in g le w ith th e u n iv e rs e ” as B y ro n said, and
w ith a ll th e people in it, w h ic h B y ro n co u ld n o t do, can
be done b y lo o k in g a t th e o th e r h a lf o f th in g s and
persons, b y w h ic h ice is h o t and o n e ^ enem y lo va b le .
I f w e w a n t to have bad re la tio n s w ith e v e ry th in g and
e verybo dy w e sh ou ld ta k e a sq ue aking doo r to be
irrita tin g , and a h y p o c rite as d is g u s tin g . B u t s tr ic tly
speaking, th in g s and persons are b o th w h a t th e y seem
to be and w h a t th e y seem n o t to be, and good re la tio n s
and bad re la tio n s are e q u a lly in te re s tin g , o r s h a ll w e
ra th e r say, each one is m ore in te re s tin g th a n a ny o th e r.
U m m on w as asked b y a m on k, “ W h a t is th e d u s t-
sam adhi?” U m m on re p lie d , “ R ice in th e b o w l, w a te r
in th e tu b .”
The “ d u s t-s a m a d h i” m eans th e suprem e sta te in
w h ic h each th in g is in te rfu s e d w ith each o th e r and w ith
ourselves. To p u t i t in a s im p le w a y, “ I t ’s (u n iv e rs a lly
in te rp e n e tra te d ) lo v e th a t m akes th e w o rld (w h e e l o f
th e L a w ) go ro u n d .” U m m on says, “ R ice is in th e
b o w l, w a te r is in th e tu b , G od’s in h is H eaven, a ll’s
rig h t w ith th e w o rld .”
U m m on asked a m on k, “ A re yo u th e garde ne r? ”
“ Yes,” he said. “ W h y h ave tu rn ip s no roo ts? ” he asked
th e m o n k, w h o co u ld n o t re p ly . “ Because,” said U m m on,
“ ra in -w a te r is p le n tifu l.”
T h is p s e u d o -s c ie n tific answ er b y U m m on, w ho no
d ou bt has h is to n g u e in h is cheek, is p re c is e ly th a t o f
126 XJmmon
th e scien tists, w ho e x p la in h ow a g ira ffe g o t its lon g
neck, b u t ca nn ot e x p la in w h y e v e ry o th e r a n im a l has
n o t a lo n g neck.
A monk said to Ummon, “ I ask you, master, to deliver
a learner from darkness and illusion quickly ! Ummon
said, “What’s th e price of rice in J 6 s h ii? ’’
T he m on k w an te d to be d e liv e re d fro m th e body o f
th is flesh in to a s p iritu a l re a lm . U m m on w a n ts to p u t
th e m o n k m ore d e e p ly in to th e darkness o f tra d e and
food and co m p e titio n . T he deepness is a ll. ”
U m m on asked a m on k, “ W h e re have y o u com e fr o m :’
“ F ro m N an ga ku,” he re p lie d . “ U s u a lly ,” said U m m on, “ I
don’t e n ta n g le people w ith w ords, and bam boozle them
w ith phrases; com e a lit t le closer r T he m on k w e n t
n ea re r, and U m m on shouted, “ Be o ff w ith y o u !’’
We are always taken in w ith apparent kindness, and
e q u a lly w ith a p p a re n t rudeness. B u t to be suspicious
o f e ve ryb o d y and e v e ry th in g is n o t th e s o lu tio n . To be
a dove and a se rp e n t in one,— th a t’s it, b u t h o w d iffic u lt!
U m m on said to K em p6, “ Please g ive m e an answ er !”
K em p6 said, “ H ave y o u been to see th e O ld M o n k ye t? ”
“I， m a b it la te ,” said U m m on. “ O h, re a lly ? ” said
K em p6. “ I th o u g h t I was a ro b b e r,” said U m m on, “ b u t
y o u ’re a b rig a n d !”
K em p6 was a d is c ip le o f T6zan (R y d k a i), and a close
frie n d o f U m m o n ^. H e re w e have tw o C h rists, tw o
B uddhas, tw o Socrates ta lk in g to g e th e r, and n e ith e r
w in s, n e ith e r loses. To ask fo r an answ er w ith o u t ask
in g a q uestion,— th is is w h a t th e u n ive rse does to us.
W ho is “ th e o ld M o n k? ” P erhaps i t is B uddha, or
perhaps th e B udd h a-he ad . W e are a lw a ys la te in e ve ry
th in g . To be la te is hum an. S lo w b u t sure. S ure b u t
slow . “ Oh, re a lly ? ” T h a t’s th e rig h t answ er fo r e ve ry
th in g , p o lite su rp rise . To be a ro b b e r,_ th a t is th e a rt
o f liv in g . To get som ething fo r n o th in g is th e aim o f
life , and U m m on says to K em p6, “ Y o u a re a b ig ge r
ro b b e r th a n I ; be m y frie n d T h is is T h o re a u ’s idea
o f frie n d s h ip .
Nine 127
U m m on said to th e assem bled m onks, “ I t is said th a t

a fte r w e h ave n o t seen someone fo r th re e days w e
m ust lo o k a t h im anew ; w h a t do y o u a ll th in k abo ut
th a t? ” A n s w e rin g h im s e lf he said, “ A th ou san d .”
E v id e n tly U m m on had n o t seen th e m onks fo r se ve ra l
days, and was lo o k in g a t th e m w ith d iffe re n t eyes, b u t
th e y gazed a t h im w ith th e ir u su a l b la n k o r a m b itio u s
o r in fe rio rity -fe e lin g faces, and he w as co n stra in e d to
w a rn th em aga in st such com placency, in d iffe re n c e , o r
e n m ity. “ A th ou san d ,” is used in v a rio u s w ays in B u d
dhism . Each o f th e past, pre sen t, and fu tu re ka lp as
has a thousand B uddhas. T he lo tu s has a thousand
petals. T he T e n d a i Sect has a thousand suchnesses,
千如是• K a n n o n has a th ousand hands and a thousand
eyes. U m m on m eans b y h is e x c la m a tio n th a t w e m ust
lo o k a t each th o u s a n d -m in d e d m an w ith o u r ow n
th o u sa n d -m in d . W e a re re m in d e d o f C h ris t’s “ S e ven ty
tim es seven 1”
A m o n k asked U m m on, “ W h a t is th e O ne S uprem e
W ay?” U m m on said, “ N in e tim e s n in e is e ig h ty one.”
The m on k said, “ T im e presses; I h ave n o t y e t entered
th e ro a d ; p o in t i t o u t to m e !” U m m on said, “ W hen
you get to th e v e ry fir s t im p re s s io n ,機，th e re is th e
W ay V9
U m m on answ ers th e m o n k in h is u su a l e n ig m a tic and
laco nic w a y. T h e re a re m a n y n in es in B u d d h ism , m ost
o f th em w ith a bad m e a n in g : th e n in e w o r ld s ,九世，sub
je c t to illu s io n ; th e n in e m a g ic a l ch aracte rs, 九字，aga in st
th e pow ers o f e v il; th e n in e m e d ita tio n s on a corpse,
九想；th e n in e fo rm s o f p r id e ,九慢；th e n in e bonds, 九
結，th a t b in d m en to th is w o rld ; th e n in e classes o f
g h o s ts ,九鬼• N in e is also is used in a good m eaning, b u t
e ig h ty one is th e n u m b e r o f k in d s o f illu s io n , n in e grades
in each o f th e n in e re a lm s o f desire. U m m on m ay be
thus im p ly in g th a t e n lig h te n m e n t is fo u n d in illu s io n
and n o w h e re else, e s p e c ia lly n o t b y se p a ra tio n fro m
illu s io n , b u t i t is ra th e r th e in e v ita b ility (o f th e
a rith m e tic re la tio n ) a t w h ic h U m m on is p o in tin g . T he
128 Ummon
m onk takes no n o tice o f th is a n yw a y, and im p lo re s

U m m on to h e lp h im . U m m on changes h is ta c tic s , and
says k in d ly to h im , “ T ry and get to th e m in d yo u have
b e fo re i t tu rn s in to a ctio n , th e p a in yo u fe e l b efore
yo u g ru m b le a t w h a t o r w ho caused it, th e em otionless,
th o u g h tle ss, n o n -m o ra l w o rld o f a ll a rt and m usic and
p o e try and re lig io n and lo v e and Z en.”
U m m on asked a q u e stio n : “ Is th e re a n y p o p u la r ta lk
on th e w a y to S okei?>, H e answ ered h im s e lf, “ T w o at
one tim e !”
S okei is th e place w h e re th e 6 th P a tria rc h ta ug ht.
“ T w o th in g s ” is hum an beings and B uddha, sameness
and d iffe re n c e , y o u and I, th e m in d and th e M in d , th is
w o rld and N irv a n a . W e say, gazing a t one a no the r in
a w ild surm ise, th a t these p a irs o f th in g s a re one th in g .
I t is a fo o lis h w a y o f ta lk in g , b u t i t passes th e tim e as
w e w a lk .
A m on k said to U m m on, “ W h a t is y o u r age, m ay I
ask?” U m m on re p lie d , “ Seven tim e s n in e , s ix ty e ig h t.”
T he m o n k said, “ W h a t do y o u m ean, seven tim e s nine,
s ix ty e ig h t? ” U m m on said, “ I to o k o ff fiv e years fo r
y o u r sake.”
A n E n g lis h sch o o l-b o y was once ca ug ht e a tin g an
a pple in class. K e e p in g h is eye on h im , th e teacher
o rd ered h im to th e fro n t. “ W h a t are yo u eating?”
“ N o th in g !” “ O pen y o u r m o n th !” In s e rtin g h is fin g e r
p u lle d o u t a la rg e b it o f apple. “ W h a t， s th is ? ”
“ A p p le , s ir.” “ H o w d id i t g e t in y o u r m o u th ? ” “ D id n ，t
k n o w i t was th e re , s ir !,f B o th U m m on and th e boy
show th e ir d isrespect fo r th e o th e r p a rty b y te llin g
an obvious lie .
‘ U m m on asked a m on k, “ W h a t a re yo u ? ” H e re p lie d ,
“ I ’m th e he巧d o f th e in firm a ry .” “ Y ou d on ， t m ean tci
say so \yt said U m m on. “ Is th e re a nyb od y n o t ill? ”
“ I d on ’t u n d e rsta n d ,” re p lie d th e m onk. “ W h y can，t
yo u understand? W h y can’t yo u u n d ersta nd ? ” said
U m m on. The m o n k was s ile n t. “ A s k m e th e same
q u e stio n ,” said U m m on. T he m o n k said, “ W ho is the
Illness 129
m a n w ith o u t any illn e s s ? ” U m m on p o in te d to th e n e x t

m onk.
U m m on, lik e C h ris t and some o th e r people, g o t tire d
o f te ach ing d u ffe rs . A m o n k alw a ys d e a lin g w ith i l l
ness and d eath m ig h t be expected to have a lit t le sense,
b u t no, he w as as bad as th e best o f th em . U m m on te lls
h im p la in ly , no one is ill, no one is d y in g , no one is
dead, no one w ill be re s u rre c te d , no one w ill go to
heaven.
U m m on said to h is m onks, “ T he w h o le u n iv e rs e is
th e m e d icin e to cu re illn e s s ,— b u t w h o ’s th e s ic k m an?”
The u n ive rse in a ll its h e a lth and h e a lth -g iv in g
ch aracte r is th e m e d icin e fo r a ll illn e s s o f m in d and
body; th a t is cle a r, b u t i f th e w h o le u n iv e rs e is th e
m edicine, w h e re can th e one w ho is i l l be, e xce p t o u t
side th e u n ive rse ,— w h ic h is an im p o s s ib ility ! U m m on
shows here th a t th e o rd in a ry , com m onsense e x p la n a tio n
o f th in g s is no b e tte r th a n th e tra n sce n d e n ta l one, in
w h ich th e u n ive rse , th e m e d icin e , is d o cto r, p a tie n t,
u n d e rta k e r, and grave. Zen m u st a vo id b o th , i f
th is can be done, and be i l l w ith o u t b e in g ill, and
w e ll w ith o u t b e in g w e ll.
U m m on said, “ A m on k sh ou ld k n o w th e eye o f a n cie n t
m en. W h a t was th is eye?” H im s e lf a n sw ering , he
said, “ I t is a toad d a n cin g up to heaven.”
T he “ a n c ie n t m en” m eans those w ho und ersto od Zen.
A toad ca nn ot dance, and a m an is n o t im m o rta l, b u t
he can do so m e thin g im p o ssib le , dance o u t o f death
in to (tim e le s s ) life . W e le a rn to do th is fro m th e
ancients.
U m m on asked a m on k, “ W here have y o u been la te
ly ? ” H e answ ered, “ W ith S aizen.” U m m on asked,
“ W hat does Saizen have to say?” T he m o n k extended
b oth arm s. U m m on slapped h im . T he m o n k e x p o s tu la t
ed, €iI have so m e th in g to say Vf U m m on extended b o th
arm s. T he m o n k w as dum b. U m m on s tru c k h im .
S a iz e n ,西禅，was a co n te m p o ra ry o f Seppo, Gensha,
and U m m on; th is is a ll th a t is k n o w n o f h im . T he
120 Ummon
monk，s posing displeased Ummon and he gave him a
slap. The monk then said he wasn’t finished yet, but
when Ummon really held out his arms, the poor monk
was silent. Ummon then delivered the verdict, a proper
blow. Ummon was not a very pugilistic teacher, but
perhaps the best way to deal with pretence and
hypocrisy is with a (physical or verbal) smack,—~if of
course the recipient has asked for it, and has agreed
to accept it.
Ummon asked a monk, “Where have you been re_
cently?” “In Sato (Chatu) 査渡 .，， “You must have worn
out a lot of straw sandals !，， The monk was silent. “I
regret those sandals,” said Ummon. “They were worn
out in vain !” he sighed.
This is very sarcastic, perhaps excusably so. Why
didn，t the monk do or say something? I myself wouldn，t
have, it's true, but it is allowed to wonder at the faults
of others. We, who know all the answers, sneer at
people a thousand years ago who had been brought up
on sermons and lectures on Buddhism.
While Ummon was drinking tea, he said, tlI wonder
why tea tastes so nice?” A monk present asked Ummon
to give his opinion on this point, and Ummon said, “It’s
customary for a bowl to have a bottom to it, and a face
that is noseless gets laughed at.” The monk was silent.
Ummon said, “You’re just a chap that goes with the
crowd and eats rice ! Just keep on doing i t !”
Ummon was always asking and answering questions,
but, like Dr. Johnson, he knew that the questions of
foolish people are all foolish. Further, he knew what
Dr. Johnson probably did not know, that no question
has an answer, no cause has an effect; everything, as
the really religious or poetical mind knows, is just as
it is, and right as it is.
A monk said to Ummon, aHow about the time when
there was no Buddha in the Buddha Hall?” Ummon
retorted, “Where does Buddha’s Brahma-voice come
from?”
Emptiness 131
One w a y to check a fo o lis h q ue stion is to ask a no the r

fo o lis h one,— fo o lis h , because w e ca nn ot ask w h y a lo n g
th in g is lo n g . M a tte rs m u st re m a in fu n d a m e n ta l. W h y
do th e flo w e rs b lo om in sp ring ? B u t “ s p rin g ” means
“ th e b lo o m in g o f flo w e rs .” W h y does B uddha appear?
B u t B uddha is w h a t appears. W h y has a B uddha a
B ra h m a -vo ice , stro n g , p u re and m elodious? T h a t is
th e n a tu re o f a B uddha. W ith o u t h is B ra h m a -vo ice ,
B uddha w o u ld n o t be B uddha.
U m m on asked a m onk, “ W here have yo u been?”
“ P a yin g m y respects a t th e graves,” said th e m onk.
“ Y o u ’re jo k in g !” said U m m on. re a lly been p a y
in g m y respects a t th e graves \f, said th e m onk. “ Y o u
don’t keep th e F iv e C om m andm ents !” said U m m on.
T he F iv e C om m andm ents a re against, k illin g , ste a l
in g , ly in g , a d u lte ry , and d rin k in g . U m m on p ro b a b ly
re fe rs to th e th ird . Zen is n o t so m uch opposed to
fu n e ra ls , m a rria g e s, and cerem onies o f a ll k in d s as in
d iffe re n t to th e jn , as i t is in d iffe re n t to m o ra lity , b ea uty,
and even s o -ca lle d tru th its e lf. In a n o th e r anecdote
co ncerning th e v is itin g o f graves, U m m on asks th e m onk,
“ D id th e (dead) p a tria rc h say a n y th in g ? ” T h is k in d
o f sarcasm co n ce rn in g s u p e rs titio n s , re lig io u s , social,
p o litic a l and so on, is n o t re a lly Zen a t a ll, b u t com m on
sense, w h ic h sh ou ld n o t a t le a st decrease w ith an u n
d e rsta n d in g o f Zen.
U m m on said, “ The re a l E m ptiness does n o t d e stro y
th in g s ,有； th e re a l E m ptiness is n o t d iffe re n t fro m
m a te r ia lity ,色 •” A m o n k th e re u p o n asked, “ W h a t is
th is re a l E m p tine ss? ” U m m on said, “ Do yo u hear th e
sound o f a b e ll? ” “ T h a t’s th e sound o f a b e ll,” said
th e m onk. “ E ven w he n yo u have reached th e Y e a r
o f th e D on key, w ill yo u s t ill be a -d re a m ? ” said U m m on.
E m ptiness is tra n sce n d e n ta l, and y e t i t is a ll-in c lu s iv e .
T hin gs e x is t because o f th e E m p tine ss; o th e rw ise , th e y
w o u ld fa ll in to em ptiness, nothingness. T he concrete
exists because o f th e a b stra ct, n o t because o f th e ir con
tra rin e s s , b u t because an o b je c t needs th e a b stra ctio n s
132 Vmmon
to hold it together, so to speak. What would white

chalk do without whiteness? This is the teaching of
Shifci sofcw ze fcil; fcil sofcit ze shifci, 色即是空，空即是色 .
Emptiness is form, form is Emptiness. Ummon chooses
the sound of a bell because of its poetry, and because
it is as nearly “ empty” a thing as we can perceive.
Ummon said, “The entire Universe, the Cosmos and
the Great Earth, and I, this old monk in this world!
With my staff I give it one blow, and say, I t is smashed
to smithereens V 9f
It is in this spirit that we must face death, and, more
important by far, face impudent children, and hysterical
women, and our own pusillanimity.
One day Ummon ascended the rostrum and said，
“Vasubandhu happened to transform himself into a staff
of chestnut wood, and, striking the earth once, all
the innumerable Buddhas were released from their
entangling words.” So saying he descended from the
pulpit.
Vasubandhu was the twenty first (Indian) patriarch,
who lived perhaps in the 5th century A.D. He was the
author of the Yuishikiron. Where this anecdote came
from, or whether it was Ummon’s own invention I don’t
know, but this Chuangtsean story means that the spirit
of worship, the “Idea of the Holy,” is the very opposite
of true religion, and that the Bibles and sacred writ
ings must be destroyed together with the universe it
self before a man can be as free as God was until its
creation.
Ummon held up his staff, and said, “We are told in
the scriptures that an ordinary man thinks the staff is
a real existence; that those of the Hinayana take it as
nothing,無： that those believing in the pratyekabuddha
take it as an illusory existence; that bodhisattvas say
its reality is emptiness. But I say unto you, take the
staff as just a staff; movement is movement; sitting
is sitting, but don’t wabble under any circumstances !’’
Ummon picked up his staff, and, showing it to the
A Staff 133
assem bled m onks, said, “ M y s ta ff has tu rn e d in to a
dragon and sw a llo w e d up th e w h o le w o rld . W h e re are
th e poo r m o u n ta in s and riv e rs and g re a t e a rth n ow ? ”
T he above tw o anecdotes, ta k e n to g e th e r, show w h a t
a s ta ff is and w h a t Z en is, b u t th e second needs some
com m ent. To e x p la in th e s ta ff becom ing a d ra g o n and
g u lp in g d ow n th e u n ive rse , w ith o u t fa llin g in to m ys
ticism , w h ic h is odious, o r p a n th e ism , w h ic h is in te l
le c tu a l, o r lite ra tu re , w h ic h is a rtific ia l,— th is is d iffic u lt.
W hat is needed is fir s t o f a ll e ne rg y o f m in d ; second,
im a g in a tio n , a S hakespearian one th a t
D oth glance fro m heaven to e a rth , fro m e a rth to

heaven.
U m m on is g o in g back to th e In d ia n (a n d th e a n c ie n t
T a o ist) v ie w o f th e w o rld as m u tu a lly in te rp e n e tra tiv e ,
each th in g c o n ta in in g a ll th in g s , a ll-th in g s c o n c e n tra t
in g its e lf in to each th in g . Each th in g has e v e ry q u a lity ;
e very q u a lity is th e same as e v e ry o th e r q u a lity , even
opposite ones. T he q u e stio n is, h ow to l i f t up th e w h o le
u n ive rse w hen w e l i f t up a spoon, h o w to d isso lve i t
to g e th e r w ith th e su ga r in th e tea, fo r i f w e can do
th is, th e re is n e v e r a d u ll m om en t. I t is c le a r th a t w e
approach th is sta te th e m ore w e a re in te re s te d in th in g s .
“ The lu n a tic , th e lo v e r, and th e p oe t are o f im a g in a tio n
a ll com pact”；th e y h ave w h a t K ie rk e g a a rd c a lls “ p u r ity
o f h e a rt,” fo r th e y th in k o f one th in g o n ly . W h a t is
th a t One T h in g ? N o one can say w h a t i t is, co m p le te ly ,
fo r i f w e co u ld re a lly say i t c o m p le te ly , w e sh ou ld be it,
and a ll th e search w o u ld be o ve r, and life be a t an end.
U m m on once sa id : “ M o n k Sei1 ( 生法師） d eclare d th a t
i f w e s trik e th e e m p ty a ir, i t m akes a sound, and th a t
a piece o f w ood w h e n h it, m akes none.” U m m on s tru c k
th e a ir w ith h is s tic k and c rie d “ O uch !” and s tru c k th e
flo o r and said, “ H e a r a n y th in g ? ” A m o n k said, “ A
sound V9 U m m o n e xcla im e d , “ D u ffe r !” and s tru c k th e
1. Who was Sei? I can’t say.

134 Ummon
floor again, and asked, “S o u n d of w h a t ? ”
Ummon was a man of great courage, who would put
any statement to the test of practical experience, and
any practical experience into a statement. Even ordi
nary people, or shall we say, with Wordsworth, especially
ordinary people sometimes feel that a stone is hurt, and
feel sympathy for it. A mother can’t hear her own child
squalling and making a nuisance of itself. Some people
feel horror at the sight of a snake. The question is,
what does God feel? We have to feel what he feels,
what the poet, the artist, the musician feels. And Zen
should feel most of all, because the back of the picture,
the unheard melodies, the dull and the stale, and cheap
and vulgar are all of infinite value. Thoreau said.
If I were confined to a corner in a garret all my

days, like a spider, the world would be just as large
to me while I had my thoughts.
The staff was a favourite tool with Zen masters, who
of course knew nothing of Freud, or they might have
hesitated to use it so much. Blessed are the impure
in heart. Funny6 (Fenyang) 汾陽， the 9th in descent
from Nangaku, said, holding up his old staff, uli you
understand this staff, you monks, your travels (行脚）
are ended !’’ This reminds us of Stevenson’s fable of
The Touchstone, 4but the meaning is different. The
staff has the meaning of the horse_shoe, “and it rusty,”
in another of his fables, The Poor Thing.
A monk asked, “What is this sword that cuts a hair
that falls on it?” Ummon said, “A patriarch.”
This keen sword may be used to signify the Buddha
nature or Buddha wisdom, but such symbols are not
merely dangerous, they are deadly. Ummon’s answer
is better because it is more material and practical.
Buddhism is the man Buddha. Christianity is Christ.
Love is God. We must always emphasise the personal
over the impersonal. In the last Case of the Hekigan-
rofcw, H a r y o (Paling) 巴陵，the next in line of U m m o n ,
Higgledy-Piggledy 135
is asked th e same q uestion. H e answ ers, “ B ranches

o f c o ra l e n fo ld in g th e m o o n lig h t,” a q u o ta tio n fro m
Zengetsu. Sh6zan (C h ia n g s h a n )蔣山，re p lie d , “ A b la c k
la cq u e r o u ts id e -p o s t.” 1 R in z a i e xcla im e d, “ B ad lu c k !
Bad lu c k !n and w hen th e m o n k w h o asked th e ques
tio n bow ed, he s tru c k h im . These answ ers are a ll
aspects, o r uses, o f th e sw ord. U m m on’s answ er is less
in te re s tin g th a n u sual, b u t perhaps th e m ost c o rre c t
o f th em a ll.
A m on k asked U m m on, “ Has B u d d h ism good p o in ts
and defects?” U m m on answ ered, “ T h is bam boo b lin d
is fiv e fe e t lo n g .”
In th e C hinese, “ good p o in ts and d efects” is “ lo n g
and s h o rt.” T he b lin d is fiv e fe e t lo n g and i t is fiv e
fe e t sh o rt. L o n g is s h o rt, and s h o rt is lo n g ; w h a t is
th e question? W h a t is th e le n g th o f a s h o rt question?
W h a t is th e shortness o f a lo n g answ er?
One day U m m on h it on th e stove w ith h is s ta ff once.
A ll th e m o n k ’s eyes m oved in th e same w a y, and U m m on
said, “ T he stove dances up to th e T h ir ty - th ir d , In d ra
H eaven. Do yo u see it? ” T he m o n k w e re speechless.
“ E x p la in th in g s to s tu p id people?” said U m m on. “ Y o u r
heads w o u ld be p u lv e ris e d V9 A g a in , d u rin g m e a l-tim e
he p o in te d to a w h ite ja r and said, “ T h is transcends th e
w ords o f th e B uddhas and th e P a tria rc h s , yo u k n o w .”
A n s w e rin g h im s e lf he said, “ F iv e tim e s n in e is fo rty
fiv e !’’ A g a in he said, “ L e t m e eat b y m y s e lf!” Then
a nother d ay he said, “ A n a n c ie n t sage said, “ A ll th a t
touches th e eye is th e W a y,” and lifte d up th e s o y -p o t
and said, “ Is th is th e W ay?” T he m onks had n o th in g
to say. U m m on said, “ Good H eavens !” and th e n in
answ er to th e fo rm e r q ue stion , “ F u n n y cast o f m in d
th a t is ! ”
F ro m such an a ccount w e fe e l th a t U m m on had a
m in d th a t in o rd in a ry persons and in o rd in a ry cases
w o u ld be c a lle d fre n z ie d . H e re is a m an m ad to teach,
1. 露柱 means the post standing out in the Hall, usually round.

136 Ummon
b u t w ith nobody w a n tin g to le a rn . C h ris t and Socrates

seem to have been s im ila r in ch a ra cte r, and s im ila rly
u n lu c k y in th e ir d iscip le s. T he w o rld o f to d a y does
n o t lis te n to a ny o f th e th re e .
U m m on said to th e head m o n k in th e H a ll, “ T e ll me,
a re yo u th e same as th e u n ive rse , o r d iffe re n t? ” “ The
same,” said th e head m onk. “ A ll liv in g th in g s , m oths,
b u tte rflie s , ants,— a re y o u th e same o r d iffe re n t? ” “ The
same,” said th e head m onk. “ W h y do yo u fig h t w ith
th em ? ” asked U m m on.
U m m on seems to have d is lik e d insects, and dogs and
anim a ls in gen eral. T h is is a serious defe ct, th a t is, a
d e fe ct o f Zen, b u t th e p o in t is, i f w e a re th e same as
noxiou s th in g s, h o w is i t possible fo r us to d e stro y one
another? U m m on does n o t re so lve th is p ro b le m , be
cause nobody can.
U m m on said to h is m onks, UI d o n 't ask yo u abo ut a ny
th in g up to th e fifte e n th o f th e m o n th , b u t say some-
th in g fo r a fte r th e fifte e n th .” A n s w e rin g h im s e lf, he
said, “ E v e ry d ay is a good d a y.”
T h is can h a rd ly be ca lle d Zen, th o u g h i t fo rm s the
6th Case o f th e H e kig a n ro ku . H ow e ver, th o u g h i t m ust
be ca lle d a tric k , i t is a Zen tric k , and ju s t as w e m ust
= o t be deceived b y th e w ords, “ b efo re th e fifte e n th ,”
“ a fte r th e fifte e n th ,” so w e m u st n o t be deceived by
th e days them selves, w h ic h appear as sacred, o r om inous,
o r am iable, o r h a te fu l, o r re p ro a c h fu l as in Em erson’s
poem , Days.
Chapter XVII
UMMON III
One d ay U m m on p u t h is h and in to th e m o u th o f a
wooden lio n and c rie d , “ H e is b itin g m e ! H e lp !
H e lp !”
T his p la y in g a t Zen is e x c e lle n t. “ B y m ere p la y in g
to go to H eaven” is in fin ite ly b e tte r th a n th e te rrib le
seriousness th a t p ro du ced th e In q u is itio n and th e c o r
responding d is lik e o f re lig io n . Zen is la u g h in g a t th e
w o rld , la u g h in g w ith th e w o rld .
A m on k asked U m m on, “ W h y does S am antabhadra rid e
on an elephant? W h y does M a n ju s ri rid e on a lio n ? ”
U m m on said, ftI have no e le p h a n t to rid e on, n o r a lio n ,
so I rid e on th e te m p le and go o u t o f th e te m p le gate.”
M a n ju s ri, th e e m b od im e nt o f w isdom , rid e s e ith e r on
a lio n o r a peacock; he o fte n h o ld a book. S am antab-
hadra is th e lo rd o f la w ,理 . U m m on says th a t w e rid e
on w h a t w e please. H e h im s e lf rid e s on B u d d h ism and
goes o u t in to th e w o rld to save people. F u k u ju
(F u s h o u )福寿，w he n asked w h y S haka d id n ’t rid e on
a n yth in g , th re w up h is hands, and said, “ H e’s no g o o d !
H e’s no good !”
A m on k asked, “ H o w a b o u t w h e n th e lio n g ro w ls ? ”
U m m on said, “ N e ve r m in d a bo ut w hen i t g ro w ls,
tr y ro a rin g .” T he m o n k d id so, b u t U m m on said,
“ I t ’s an o ld r a t sq u e a kin g .”
W h a t is im p o rta n t in a q u e stion , perhaps th e o n ly
im p o rta n t th in g a b o u t it, is th e to n e o f vo ice , th e m an
ner, th e in to n a tio n , th e e n u n c ia tio n . T h is decides th e
Zen o f th e q u e stion , th a t is, i f i t is a re a l q ue stion o r
not. I f i t is a re a l q ue stion , i t answ ers its e lf. The
actua l a nsw er is o n ly th e w in d th a t b lo w s th e crest
138 Ummon
o f th e w ave o ver. , , ,
U m m on asked a m on k, "D id yo u hea r th e lon g-b ea ked
b ird s p re a ch in g Zen in K o ze i, K onan? No, I d ia n t,
re p lie d th e m onk. U m m on raised h is s ta ff, and said,
“ Zen !，，
<<L o n g -b e a ke d ,> m eans g a rru lo u s . U m m on h im s e lf
was fo n d o f ta lk in g , and n o t, a p p a re n tly , o f lis te n in g .
H ow e ver, U m m on n e ve r fo rg e ts th a t Zen is ta lk in g
th in g s , n o t ta lk in g a bo ut th in g s .
A monk asked Ummon, “How about when a blind
tu rtle fin d s a h ole in a flo a tin g log?^ U m m on answ ered,
“ The o ld m o n k fo ld s h is hands and dep arts !’’
The b lin d tu rtle and so on is a sym b o l o f th e d iffic u lty ,
th e u n lik e lih o o d o f h e a rin g abo ut Zen in th is w o rld .
U m m on answ ers s im p ly th a t w e can o n ly say, N ow
th o u le tte s t th y s e rv a n t d e p a rt in peace, fo r m ine
eyes___ ” W hen Joshu was asked th is question, he
answ ered, ra th e r s u p e rs titio u s ly , “ I t is n o t an accident•’
U m m on said, ^ W ith in th e cosmos, w ith in th e universe
th e re is a T reasure. I t hides w ith in th e body. W e p ic k
up th e la m p and ta ke i t in to th e B u ddha H a ll, We
ta ke th e G re a t G ate and p u t i t on th e la m p .”
The word “in,” which Ummon uses, is misleading.
Is th e soul “ in ” th e body? I f so, i t m u st have th e shape
o f th e body, w h ic h i t fills co m p le te ly . W h a t is the
Treasure? Is i t th e B u dd h a n a tu re , o r G od, o r the
u n iv e rs a l soul, o r Zen? I w o u ld ra th e r say i t is the
p o e tic a l n a tu re , w h ic h enables us to do a ll things,
o rd in a ry and e x tra o rd in a ry ,— i f th e re be tw o k in d s o f
th in g s , as U m m on suggests b y h is tw o exam ples o f
w h a t th e e n lig h te n e d m an can do.
U m m on said, “ The a n cie n t B uddhas and th e outside
post are a lw ays h a v in g in te rc o u rs e w ith each o th e r; is
th is su b je c tiv e ? ” T he m onks w e re dum b. H im s e lf
re p ly in g , “ W hen clouds ris e o ve r th e S o u th e rn M ou nta in,
ra in fa lls on th e N o rth e rn M o u n ta in .”
T he life le s s outsid e post o f th e te m p le , and th e (ap
p a re n tly ) life fu l B u d d h a s ,—
— w h a t separates them ?
Wordsworth 139
‘*W hom G od h a th jo in e d le t no (u n p o e tic a l, u n im a g in a

tiv e , in a rtis tic , u n m u sica l, irre lig io u s ) m an p u t asunder.”
W o rd sw o rth says:
Love , now a u n iv e rs a l b irth ,

F ro m h e a rt to h e a rt is ste a lin g ,
F ro m e a rth to m an, fro m m an to eat h :
— I t is th e h o u r o f fe e lin g .
T his in te rco u rse , o f w h ic h U m m on gives an e xam ple in

the B uddhas and th e post, is u n iv e rs a l. I t is n o t m e re ly
fro m m an to m an, o r m an to w om an, b u t fro m th e h e a rt
o f each th in g to th e h e a rt o f a n o th e r. M an loves th e
e a rth ; th e e a rth loves m an. B u t W o rd s w o rth n o t o n ly
im ive rsa lise s, he p a rtic u la ris e s . I t is in s p rin g , “ th e
firs t m ild d ay o f M a rc h ,” th a t th is “ fe e lin g ,” th is m u tu a l
in tu itio n has its h o u r. U m m on, lik e W o rd s w o rth , does
n o t leave us w ith th is a n im ism th a t is o n ly “ in h ou rs
o f in s ig h t w ille d ,” b u t says th a t th e o rd in a ry th in g s o f
N a tu re are no less m ira c u lo u s , th e clouds, th e m ou n
ta ins, th e ra in .
U m m on said to h is m onks, <4G iv e m e a sentence e x
pressing th e tip s o f a h u n d re d w eeds.^ T he m onks m ade
no re p ly . U m m on said，“ T o g e th e r,倶 •”
B e in g such an in d iv id u a lis t, U m m on kn e w , lik e D r.
Johnson, th a t m an is a so cia l a n im a l; he liv e s w ith
others, o r n o t a t a ll. T h is d o u b le n a tu re o f m an is
b ro u g h t o u t b y a n o th e r anecdote, in w h ic h U m m on was
asked a bo ut (s o lita ry ) w a ll-m e d ita tio n . H e said, “ I t
is re p e a tin g th e B u d d h a ’s nam e a ll to g e th e r.”
A m o n k asked U m m on, “ H o w a bo ut b e fo re G ozu m et
the F o u rth P a tria rc h ? ” 2 U m m on said, “ K a n n o n in e ve ry
house.” “ A n d a fte r? ” asked th e m on k. “ A centipede
in t h e f ir e , s w a n 〇w in g a t ig e r ，
” a n s w e re d U m m o n .
B e fo re G ozu m e t th e F o u rth P a tria rc h , h is life was
as o rd in a rily pioxxs as th e n e x t-d o o r B u d d h is t, b u t a fte r
he m e t h im , he liv e d tra n s c e n d e n ta lly , e ve ry act
2. See page 10.

140 Ummon
m ira cu lo u s, e v e ry th o u g h t s u p e rn a tu ra l.
U m m on said to a m on k, “ W h a t n a tio n a lity are you?”
H e said, “ I am fro m S illa .” “ W h a t d id yo u b rin g w ith
yo u across th e sea?” asked U m m on. “ T he s m a ll rob be r
m akes a b ig fa ilu re ,” answ ered th e m o n k. “ W h y are
yo u in m y hands?” asked U m m on. “ I t is ju s t so,”
re p lie d th e m on k. U m m on said, “ I a llo w yo u to ju m p
o u t.”
“ T he s m a ll ro b b e r m akes a b ig fa ilu re ,m e a n s , “ D on’t
tr y y o u r tric k s on m e !’’ T he m o n k re je c ts U m m on’s.
“ W h a t d id y o u b rin g w ith yo u ? ” as b e in g a w o rn -o u t
Zen q uestion. U m m on a d m its th e m o n k ’s independent
a ttitu d e , b u t rep ro ves h im , sa yin g, “ （ I f so) w h y are
yo u here b e fo re m e, a skin g fo r m y h e lp ? ” T he m onk
m a in ta in s h is independence, and say he is th e re , be
cause he happens to be th e re , n o t fro m a ny necessity
o f b e in g ta u g h t, b u t b y chance o r fa te . U m m on says,
^Y o u m ay be in d e p e n d e n t o f m e i f yo u w is h /'
A m on k said to U m m on, “ H o w can w e spend the
tw e lv e hou rs o f th e d ay w ith o u t w a s tin g them ?” U m
m on said, “ W h a t a re y o u g e ttin g a t? ” T he m o n k said,
“ I don’t u n d e rsta n d ; please te ll m e.” U m m on m ade a
verse, and gave i t to h im :
I t is bad n o t to lo o k a t w h a t is p o in te d o u t to yo u;
I f yo u in te n d ju s t to d ich otom ise, in w h a t e te rn ity
w ill yo u becom e enligh ten e d?
U m m on saw th a t th e m o n k w as ju s t a sim p le to n , and

gave h im a c o u p le t to th in k o ver. W h a t is m ost
d iffic u lt o f a ll is ju s t to lo o k a t w h a t yo u see, w ith o u t
b eing fo r i t o r a ga in st it, w ith o u t b e in g in d iffe re n t to
it, b e lie v in g in it.
A m on k asked U m m on, “ W h a t is U m m on’s one tune?”
U m m on answ ered, “ T he tw e n ty fifth o f D ecem ber.，，
“ H ow a bo ut th e one w ho sings it? ” asked th e m onk.
“ N o t a care in th e w o rld !” said U m m on.
One tune, —曲，means U m m on’s u n iq u e and m ost p ro -
Buddhism 141
fo un d v ie w o f th e w o rld . U m m on’s answ er m eans th a t

h is s p e c ia lity is h is p u re nonsense, lik e th a t o f L e a r
and L e w is C a rro ll. T he s in g e r is, w h ile he is s in g in g
h is song a t least, c a re -fre e , and a lw a ys, so as fa r as
he is h im s e lf concerned.
U m m on said, “ B u d d h ism is ju s t te rr ific ! T he tongue
is so s h o rt.” T hen he added, “ So lo n g .” A ls o he said,
“ W hen w e have fin is h e d c u ttin g w ith a g re a t axe, w e
ru b o u r hands to g e th e r.”
The expression 太熬，Japanese hanahada, and 甚，太，
太甚，太殺，可熬，念熬，絶，酷，w e re a ll v u lg a ris m s o f th e
Sung P e rio d , and m ea nt “ k illin g ,” “ enorm ous,” “ a w fu l,”
in th e slang sense. B u d d h ism is d iffic u lt to e x p la in ; o u r
a b ility is in s u ffic ie n t. O n th e o th e r hand, i t is d iffic u lt
because w e ta lk to o m uch. A n d w he n w e have fin ish e d
o u r le c tu re , o r o u r ch a p te r, w e fe e l a k in d o f nausea, a
rea ction , fro m o v e r-s tra in .
A m on k asked R e iju ( L in g s h u ) 霊樹，“ W h a t is th e
m eaning o f D a ru m a ’s com ing to th e W est?” R e iju w as
sile n t. A fte r he d ie d, people w a n te d to in s c rib e h is
doings on h is to m b -sto n e , and th is in c id e n t w as decided
on. A t th is tim e U m m on was th e c h ie f m on k, and one o f
the m onks asked h im h o w to p u t th e in c id e n t o f th e
re m a in in g s ile n t on th e g ra ve -sto n e . U m m on said,
“ W rite , ‘T eacher’.”
W e teach s ile n tly , and o n ly s ile n tly , th o u g h w e m ay
be s ile n t o r ta lk . R e iju d id n o t teach b y h is b eing
s ile n t, b u t b y h is silence, a S ile n ce w h ic h n e v e r stopped,
even w ith h is d eath and e te rn a l silence.
U m m on com posed a verse:
A sentence w h ic h does n o t re v e a l its m eaning

A tta in s its end b e fo re b e in g spoken.
Y ou press fo rw a rd , w ith m o u th a -c h a tte r,
B e tra y in g y o u r n o t k n o w in g w h a t to do.
The fir s t tw o lin e s lo o k lik e m ere p e rve rse c o n tra

d ictorin e ss, b u t th is is n o t so. In a c tu a l d a ily experience,
o r ra th e r, in m o n th ly and y e a rly , n o t to say life ly e x
142 Ummon
perience, i t is a lw a ys th e unspoken in te n tio n th a t is
e ffe c tiv e , n o t th e w o rd s w h ic h fo llo w .
U m m on said to h is m onks, ^The O ld B a rb a ria n , w hen
he was b o rn , w ith one hand he p o in te d h is fin g e r at
th e sky, w ith th e o th e r he p o in te d h is fin g e r to the
e a rth , loo ked in th e fo u r d ire c tio n s , to o k seven steps
and said, ‘A b o ve H eaven, and b e lo w H eaven, I am the
o n ly H on ou red O ne.’ I f I had seen h im a t th a t tim e ,
I w o u ld have beaten h im to death w ith m y s ta ff, and
fe d h im to th e dogs, so as to b rin g peace to th e w o rld .”
U m m on is n o t m e re ly p ra is in g b y blam e. E v il arises
to g e th e r w ith good, d e lu sio n w ith e n lig h te n m e n t. The
w o rld o f anim a ls, fo r a ll th e e a tin g and b eing eaten, is
a w o rld o f peace, and even th e e n lig h te n e d m an can
sca rce ly re ta in th e peace th a t passeth m isu nd e rsta nd ing .
U m m on is perhaps th e g re ate st m an C h in a produced.
H e is a m ix tu re o f Selden, S w ift, S id ne y S m ith , and
O scar W ild e . H e has h is s u p e rs titio n s , i t is tru e ,
B u d d h is t and T a o ist, fo r e xam ple th e b e lie f in re in
ca rn a tio n , b u t i t is easy fo r us, m ore th a n a thousand
years la te r, to lo o k back upon h im and see how he
co uld n o t in e v e ry w a y tran scen d h is age and place,
b u t fo r boldness, succinctness, p ro fu n d ity , u n iv e rs a lity ,
tra n s c e n d e n ta lity , o n ly E c k h a rt and T ho rea u come near
h im . F o r th is reason, he is u n k n o w n outsid e C hina
and Japan. E ven in Japan a lm o st no one know s his
nam e, and h is g o ro ku , th e account o f h is life and say
ings, is p ra c tic a lly u n o b ta in a b le .
U m m on’s c h ie f d is c ip le , and th e o n ly one re a lly
w o rth y o f h im was Tozan, to be d is tin g u is h e d fro m the
c o -fo u n d e r o f th e Soto sect, w hose nam e was R yoka i;
U m m on’s T6zan was Shusho (S houch‘u ) ,守初• H is dates
are u n kn o w n , and n o th in g is k n o w n o f h is life , b u t
he is re sp on sible fo r one o f th e m ost fam ous o f a ll
koans. A m on k asked T6zan, “ W h a t is th e Buddha?”
“ T hre e pounds o f fla x ,” he answ ered. T h is re p ly is
spontaneous, m yste rio u s, s a tis fa c to ry . T h e re is n o th in g
m ore to ask, n o th in g m ore to say. I t re m in d s one a
Tozan 143
little o f H iju ’s3 a nsw er to a m o n k ’s que stion , ‘^ h a t is

th e B uddha?” “ I t ’s a ca t c lim b in g th e g re a t ro u n d
p illa r o f th e H a ll.” W hen th e p o o r chap said, “ I d on ’t
u n d e rsta n d ,” he re p lie d , “ A s k th e p illa r !”
W hen Tozan w e n t to le a rn fro m U m m on, he was
asked w h e re he had com e fro m . “ F ro m Sato (C h ‘a tu )
査渡 he re p lie d . U m m on asked, “ W h e re d id y o u spend
th e sum m er?” “ A t H 6 ji T em ple, in K o n a n .” “ W hen
d id y o u lea ve th e re ? ” “ O n th e 25th o f A u g u s t.”
U m m on said, “ I fo rg iv e y o u th ir ty b lo w s w ith th e
s tic k .” T he n e x t d a y Tozan asked U m m on, <4H o w d id
I deserve those b lo w s yesterda y? W here w as I a t
fa u lt? ” U m m on said, ‘*You b ig ric e -b a g ! Y o u w a n d e r
fro m W est o f th e r iv e r to S o uth o f th e L a k e lik e th a t V9
A t th is , Tozan w as g re a tly e n lig h te n e d , and said, ^F ro m
now on, I w ill go w h e re th e re is no sm oke o f hum an
h a b ita tio n , keep n o t a g ra in o f ric e , b u t w ill e n te rta in
a ll th e p eo ple fro m th e te n d ire c tio n s o f th e w o rld ,
dissolve th e g lu e [o f th e ir a tta c h m e n t] and release th em
fro m th e ir ' bonds !’’ U m m on said, “ Y o u r b od y is no
b ig g e r th a n a coconut, b u t w h a t a b ig m o u th w he n
yo u open i t V9
W h a t w as Tdzan’s e n lig h te n m e n t? W h a t d id he
perceive? H e s u d d e n ly saw h im s e lf, a tra v e lle r, as a
n o n -tra v e lle r; a re lig io u s s p irit, as a ric e -b a g ; im m o rta l,
because u n -b o rn . U m m on’s re m a rk w as th e sim p le st
and le a st m e a n in g fu l he co u ld m ake, and th e re fo re , a ll
th e m ore Tozan p e rce ive d th e d iv in e s im p lic ity and
su b lim e m eaninglessness o f th e w o rld . A s G oethe said,
re n u n c ia tio n is th e se cret o f life , fo r re n u n c ia tio n m eans
death, th a t is, rice -b a g -n e ss.
A m o n k asked Tozan, <rW hat is th e P u re D harm a
B ody?>, Tozan said, uT he c ro w -b la c k tu r tle n o t e n te r
in g th e w a te r, b u t g o in g a b o u t in th e d u st o f th e e a rth .>,
T he P u re D h a rm a B o d y m eans a r e a lity beyond
p u rity and im p u rity , thus, th e tru e n a tu re o f m an. T he
3 . 稗樹， disciple o f Yakvisan.
144 Ummon
a c tiv ity o f th is tru e n a tu re is s u p e r-n a tu ra l, b u t a t the
same tim e is w h a t m akes n a tu ra l th in g s n a tu ra l. ”
T6zan asked a monk, “You are a new-comer?” :‘Yes,”
he replied. “You stayed here overnight; how is it th is
morning?” The monk answ ered, “ T he w in d is b lo w in g
ra th e r s tro n g ly , b lo w in g up th e b ack o f th e b lu e m ou n-
tains.” T6zan said, “That won’t do; try again!”
“ G oodbye,” said th e m on k. Tozan h it h im .
T he m o n k answ ered ra th e r im p u d e n tly , q u o tin g some
verse, a p in g th e teacher. T h is s o rt o f th in g increased
w ith tim e , u n til i t becam e th e ta sk o f th e stu d e n t-m o n k
o n ly to fin d some q u o ta tio n to f it th e p ro b le m .
A monk said to T6zan, “ A monk,雲水， is one who
m ixe s w ith o th e rs; w h a t k in d o f m an is he w ho a rrive s
a t th e s u m m it o f th e m o u n ta in ? ” Tozan said, UA m an
w ith o u t legs goes w e ll; a m an w ith o u t hands gets h old
o f th in g s e a s ily .”
A m an w ith o u t a m b itio n gets to th e to p . “ B y th a t sin
fe ll th e angels.”
A m on k said to T6zan, “ H o w a bo ut w he n th e c a rt
stops, b u t th e o x doesn’t? ” T6zan said, “ W h y not
e m p lo y a d riv e r? ”
T he m o n k says, “ The flesh is w illin g , b u t th e s p irit
is w e a k.” T6zan says, “ U n d e rn e a th a re th e e ve rla stin g
arm s.^ In (In d ia n ) B u d d h ism , th e o x is th e m ost im
p o rta n t o f anim a ls. In th e H o kke S u tra , B u dd h ism is
com pared to a c a rt d ra w n b y a w h ite ox, and in th e Y u i-
k y 6 S u tr a ,遺教経，re lig io u s p ra ctice s a re illu s tra te d by
a p a stu re cow. In Zen th e re a re m an y m ondo connected
w ith cows, and th e re are th e b u ll-h e rd in g p ictu re s, the
p ro b le m , as w ith th e m on k, b e in g to c o n tro l th e b u ll.
W ho is th e d riv e r? I t is B uddha, th e B uddha nature,
th e n a tu re o f N a tu re , S o m eth ing beyond a ll these, b u t
closer th a n b re a th in g .
T6zan asked a m onk, “ W here have yo u com e fro m ? ”
“ F ro m J o s h ti,汝州 “ H ow fa r was th a t? ” “ Seven
h u n d re d leagues.” “ H o w m an y s tra w -sa n d a ls d id you
w ea r o ut? ” “ T hree p a irs .” “ H ow d id yo u get the
Tdzan 145
m oney to b u y th em ? ” “ B y m a k in g u m b re lla s .” Tozan

said, “ Go back to th e m onks’ H a ll!’’ The m o n k m ade
h is sa lu ta tio n s, and o ff he w e n t.
I th in k i t w o u ld have been m ore h o p e fu l i f he had
robbed a b a n k o r g o t th e m oney fro m p in -b a ll m achines.
Such an honest and fa ith fu l fe llo w is as hopeless as
th e m ost a m b itio u s v illa in .
A m o n k asked T 6zati, “ W h a t is a fo rm le ss to w e r? ”
T6zan re p lie d , “ A stone lio n a t th e crossw ays.”
I t is im p o rta n t n e ve r to fa ll in to th e absolute, th e
form less, th e s p iritu a l, and n e ve r to fa ll in to th e re
la tiv e , th e fo rm -fu l, th e m a te ria l. “ F orm le ss, 無縫
is lite r a lly “ seam less.” Tozan trie s to get th e m onk
in to th e re g io n betw een th e tw o .
Chapter X V III
THE SANDOKAI
T he S a ndokai (T s 'a n fu n g c h 'i) was w ritte n b y S h ih fo u

( S e k it6 ) 石頭， 700-790， th e d is c ip le o f C hingyuan
(S e ig e n )青原 . Wh e n S h ih t‘ou was tw e lv e o r th irte e n
years o ld he m et th e S ix th P a tria rc h , Eno, w ho
d ie d soon a fte rw a rd s . H e liv e d a t th e S o u th e rn Tem ple,
南寺，w h e re he fo u n d a fla t stone, b u ilt a h u t o ve r it,
and d id zazen th e re . F ro m th is he w as ca lle d S h ih t‘ou,
“ S tone-head.” I t is said th a t w he n he was young,
lik e th e poet Po C h iii (see page 14) he got a n g ry a t
th e s ig h t o f people k illin g cows and o ffe rin g w in e to
th e s h rin e o f th e gods; he b ro k e dow n th e a lta rs and
le d th e cows back hom e. H is e n lig h te n m e n t was a tta in
ed in ra th e r an u n u su a l w a y, b y re a d in g . T he book
was C haohm ，肇論，w ritte n b y S d n g c h a o ,僧肇， one o f
K u m a ra jiv a ’s fo u r d is c ip le s ,四哲，abo ut 400 A .D . T his
was composed in p ris o n w h ile w a itin g to be executed.
T he passage w h ic h b ro u g h t on S h ih t‘ou’s e n lig h te n m e n t
w as: “ H e w ho m akes h im s e lf to be a ll th e th in g s o f
th e u n ive rse , is n o t he th e re a l sage?” 会万物為己者夫
唯聖人乎• The title o f th e poem , has an in
te re s tin g m eaning. Ts^m m eans th a t a ll th in g s are in
a d iffe re n t c o n d itio n fro m one a n o th e r; t (ung th a t a ll
th in g s are equal and id e n tic a l in th e ir essential charac
te r; ch(i th a t th e d iffe re n ce o f th e phenom ena is th e state
o f e q u a lity . T s ^ n fu n g c h H th u s m eans ^c o n d itio n , fu n d a
m e n ta l being, and th e ir u n ite d a c tiv ity .,>
^*he o b je c t o f th e iSand6fcai is to see th e universe
as i t re a lly is, b u t th e que stion is, w ith w h a t eye? T ha t
i t is possible fo r th e in te lle c t, a p a rt o f th e m icrocosm os,
to grasp th e w h o le o f th e m acrocosm os m u st be con
The Sandokai 147
sidered h ig h ly u n lik e ly (u p o n in te lle c tu a l g ro u n d s)

and Zen— th e essence o f th e u n ive rse , and th e u n iv e rs e
o f w h ic h i t is th e essence— m u st be expounded in th e
Zen, n o t th e ra tio n a l w a y. H o w e ve r, th e S a nd o kai
m ay be ta ke n m ore g e n e ro u sly as a v a lia n t a tte m p t to
show th a t th e Zen e xpe rie nce (th e e xpe rie nce b y th e
u niverse o f th e u n iv e rs e ) is a t le a st n o t c o n tra d ic te d
b y reason and a syste m a tic c o n sid e ra tio n o f existence.
The S andokai is in verse fo rm , fo r ty fo u r lin e s o f
fiv e characters each.
竺土大仙心，東西密相附。
人根有利鈍，道無南北祖〇
霊滬明晈潔，支派喑流注。
T H E M IN D O F T H E G R E A T S A G E O F IN D IA 1
W A S C O N V E Y E D C O R D IA L L Y F R O M W E S T TO
E A S T .2
IN H U M A N B E IN G S T H E R E A R E W IS E M E N A N D
F O O LS ,
B U T IN T H E W A Y T H E R E IS N O N O R T H E R N OR
S O U T H E R N T E A C H E R .8
T H E M Y S T E R IO U S SO URCE IS C LE A R A N D
B R IG H T :
T H E T R IB U T A R Y S T R E A M S *4 F L O W T H R O U G H
T H E D A R K N E S S .5* *
執事元是迷，契理亦非悟。
TO B E A T T A C H E D TO T H IN G S ,8 T H IS IS IL L U -
1. Buddha. 2. From India. 3. See Vol. I, page 214.
4. Phenomena.
5. Nothingness. The water of the Source is no different from
that of the tributaries, though one is light, the other is dark. This
is what Dante means when he says, in Paradiso, V 7;
E s’altra cosa vostro amor seduce,
Non se non di quella alcun vestigio
Mai conosciuto che quivi traluce.
And if some other (earthly) thing draw your love away,
Naught is it but a vestige of the Light,
Half-understood, which shines through that thing.
6. Their variety and difference.
148 The Sandokai
B U T TO T A K E TO O N E S E LF T H E U N IV E R S A L
R E A S O N IS N O T E N L IG H T E N M E N T .7
門々一切境，回互不回互。
回而更相渉，不爾依位住。
E A C H A N D A L L T H E [E L E M E N T S O F T H E ]
S U B JE C T IV E A N D O B JE C T IV E SPH ER ES8
A R E R E L A T E D , A N D A T T H E S A M E T IM E IN -
D EPEN D EN Tr
R E L A T E D , Y E T W O R K IN G D IF F E R E N T L Y ,
T H O U G H E A C H K E E P S IT S O W N P L A C E .9
色元殊質像，声本異楽苦。
暗合上中言，明分清濁句。
FO R M M A K E S T H E C H A R A C T E R A N D A P
P E A R A N C E D IF F E R E N T ;
SO U N D [T A S T E , S M E L L , E T C .] D IS T IN G U IS H 103
2
11*1
C O M FO R T A N D D IS C O M F O R T .
T H E D A R K 11 M A K E S A L L W O R D S O N E;
T H E B R IG H T N E S S 15 D IS T IN G U IS H E S GOOD A N D
B A D L IT E R A T U R E .
四大性自復，如子得其母。
THE FO U R E L E M E N T S 18 R E T U R N TO T H E IR
7. To grasp that all things are one is only half of enlighten

ment, for all things are also manifold.
8. Êach** means ears, eyes, etc., whose activity is subjective.
“ All” is colours, sounds, etc.， which are inventions of the mind,
“ flowers of the air.”
9. Objects have on the one hand only a subjective existence
and are merely relations in the mind; but on the other an object
is an isolated object in itself, apart from any subject.
10. Give rise to.
11. The Dark is the Mysterious Source which before was taken
as light.
12. This is the Darkness of a few lines before, that is, pheno-
menalising differentiation.
13. The Four Elements refers to all the things in the world,
Including human beings themselves.
The Sanddkai 149
N A T U R E 14
AS A C H IL D TO IT S M O T H E R .
火熱風動摇，水湿地堅固。
眼色耳音声，鼻香舌鹹酢。
而於一々法，依根葉分布。
F IR E IS H O T, W IN D M O V E S ,
W A T E R IS W E T, E A R T H H A R D .1561
EYES SEE, E A R S H E A R ,
T H E NO SE S M E L LS , T H E T O N G U E T A S T E S O N E
S A L T , A N O T H E R SO UR.
E A C H 10 IS IN D E P E N D E N T O F T H E O TH E R ,
B U T T H E D IF F E R E N T L E A V E S C O M E F R O M
T H E S A M E R O O T.
本末須帰宗，尊卑用其語。
C A U S E A N D E F F E C T B O T H N E C E S S A R IL Y
D E R IV E F R O M T H E G R E A T R E A L IT Y .17
T H E W O RD S “ H IG H ” A N D “ L O W ” A R E U SE D
R E L A T IV E L Y .18
当明中有喑，勿以暗相遇。
当喑中有明，勿以明相覩。'
明暗各相対，比如前後歩。
万物自有功，当言用及処。
W IT H IN T H E L IG H T T H E R E IS D A R K N E S S ,
B U T D O N O T B E A T T A C H E D T O T H IS D A R K
NESS.
W IT H IN T H E D A R K N E S S T H E R E IS L IG H T ,
B U T DO N O T L O O K FO R T H A T L IG H T .
L IG H T A N D D A R K N E S S A R E A P A IR ,
L IK E T H E F O O T B E F O R E A N D T H E F O O T B E -
14. This nature is the Buddha nature.

15. These lines remind us of the Anglo-Saxon gnomic verses.
16. “ Each” means each “ thing” resulting from external objects
and internal faculties.
17. This is Laotse，s “ Way that cannot be called a Way.”
18. They have no meaning， any more than the words “ absolute”
and “ relative” have, as far as the Great Reality is concerned.
150 The Sandokai
H IN D IN W A L K IN G .
E A C H T H IN G H A S IT S O W N IN T R IN S IC V A L U E ,1*
A N D IS R E L A T E D TO E V E R Y T H IN G E LS E IN
F U N C T IO N A N D P O S IT IO N .1
920
事存函蓋合，國 6 箭鋒拄。
O R D IN A R Y L IF E F IT S T H E A B S O L U T E A S A
B O X A N D IT S L ID ;
T H E A B S O L U T E W O R K S T O G E T H E R W IT H T H E
R E L A T IV E L IK E TW O A R R O W S M E E T IN G
IN M ID -A IR .21
承言須会宗，勿自立規矩。
触目不会道，運足焉知路。
道歩非近速，迷隔山河固。
R E A D IN G T H E A B O V E L IN E S Y O U S H O U LD
H A V E G R A S P E D T H E G R E A T R E A L IT Y .
D O N O T JU D G E B Y A N Y S T A N D A R D S .
IF Y O U D O N O T SEE T H E W A Y ,
Y O U DO N O T SEE IT , T H O U G H Y O U AR E
A C T U A L L Y W A L K IN G O N IT .
W H E N Y O U W A L K T H E W A Y , IT IS N O T N E A R ,
IT IS N O T F A R .22
IF Y O U A R E D E L U D E D , Y O U A R E M O U N T A IN S
A N D R IV E R S A W A Y F R O M IT .
謹白参玄人，光陰莫虚度。
I S A Y R E S P E C T F U L L Y T O TH O S E W H O W IS H
TO B E E N L IG H T E N E D .
“ DO N O T W A S T E Y O U R T IM E IN V A IN .”
T he S and o kai is an e x p o s itio n o f th e T e n d a i Kegon

p h ilo s o p h y , in th a t i t id e n tifie s opposites and equates
th e in d iv id u a l person to th e U n iv e rs a l S oul. The
19. Is absolute.
20. Is relative.
21. This refers to a story of two masters of archery. When
they shot at each other， their skill was so great， so “ equal/， that
the two arrows met head-on, and fell to the ground.
22. Walking, real Walking, is not from here to there.
The Sandokai 151
S andokai, h o w e ve r, h a rd ly s trik e s one as a Zen com

p o s itio n , ra th e r as a B u d d h is t one. I t la cks th e
s im p lic ity o f th e H s in h s in m in g , th e concreteness o f
H a k u in ^ W asan, and th e h u m o u r o f th e M um on kan .
W o rst o f a ll, i t is d e fic ie n t in p o e try . In a w o rd , i t
belongs to an e a rly p e rio d in th e h is to ry o f Zen w hen
re lig io n w as s till u n e a s ily a llie d to p h ilo s o p h ic a b stra c
tio n . T he p o e try o f Zen, in w h ic h w o rd s are th in g s
and th in g s a re w ords, is q u ite d iffe re n t fro m th is .
T here h ave been an enorm ous n u m b e r o f tre a tise s
on th e S andokai, b e g in n in g w ith H ogen (F a ye n )
法眼，and in c lu d in g Secch6 (H s U e h to u )雪赛 . In Japan,
T e n ke i D e n s o n ,天桂伝尊，1648-1735, o f th e S6t6 Sect,
w ho also w ro te com m entaries on th e H e k ig a n ro k u ,
S7i6bdgfenz6， etc.， c ritic is e d th e jSanddfcai in To-
dofcw fco,塗毒鼓•
Chapter X I X
THE HOKYOZAM M AI
T he ffd fc i/d z a m m a i,宝鏡三昧，P aoching S am m ei, “ The

T re a s u re -M irro r o f H e a ve n ly B lis s ,” is a verse com
p o s itio n w h ic h has been ascribed to v a rio u s auth ors. A t
th e p re se n t tim e , T6zan (T u n g s h a n )洞山，807-869，is
considered to be th e m ost lik e ly , b u t co m p aring th is
in c o h e re n t and p e ttifo g g in g “ poem ” w ith th e account
g iv e n o f Tozan in h is g o ro ku , a fa r less g ifte d Zen
m aster w o u ld be m ore su ita b le . H o w e ve r, th e o the r
nam es suggested are Y akusan and U ngan, w hom also
one w o u ld n o t lik e to saddle w ith it.
The H okyd zam m ai consists o f 376 characters, 94
lin e s o f 4 characte rs each. I t is co m m on ly read d a ily
in tem ples o f th e Soto b ra n ch o f th e Zen Sect. I doubt
w h e th e r m ost o f th e m onks u n d e rsta n d w h a t th e y are
re c itin g . E ven an E n g lis h tra n s la tio n can h a rd ly m ake
th e s h o rt-lin e d o rig in a l appear in te re s tin g . Tozan says
th a t th e w o rld is m ade o u t o f th e tw o elem ents o f same
ness and d iffe re n c e ; th a t w o rd s a re dangerous; th a t the
re la tiv e and a bsolute are one th in g ; th a t n o -th o u g h t,
th a t is, free do m fro m d is c rim in a tio n and d ich otom y, is
th e s a lv a tio n o f th e so ul; th a t a ll th in g s m ust obey one
a n o th e r. W hen Zen adepts tu rn to lite ra tu re th e y ofte n
show some fu n d a m e n ta l shortcom ings. T he y should
s tic k to th e ir shouts and b low s.
如是之法。佛祖密付。
汝今得之。宣善保護O
銀怨盛雪。明月蔵黧。
類之不齊。混則無処。
T H E TH U S N ESS O F T R U T H
H A S B E E N C O N V E Y E D FR O M B U D D H A S A N D
P A T R IA R C H S IN T IM A T E L Y .
The Hokyozammai 153
Y O U A R E N O W IN PO SSESSIO N O F IT :
G U A R D IT W E L L !
SNO W H E A P E D IN A S IL V E R D IS H ,
A W H IT E H E R O N H ID D E N IN T H E B R IG H T
M O O N L IG H T ,1—
TH ESE A R E A L IK E , B U T N O T T H E S A M E ,
C O N FU SED , B U T D IS T IN G U IS H A B L E .
意不在言。来機亦赴。
動成窠臼。差落顧佇。
背触倶非。如大火聚。
T H E M E A N IN G O F T H IN G S IS IN E X P R E S S IB L E
IN W O RD S,123 * *
B U T T H E Y A R E H IN T S TO T H E S E A R C H IN G
S P IR IT .
W H E N Y O U D IC H O T O M IS E Y O U F A L L IN T O A
H O LE;
W H E N Y O U OPPOSE T H IN G S Y O U A R E F U L L
O F U N C E R T A IN T Y .
G E T T IN G N E A R IT , OR B E IN G F A R FR O M IT ,—
BO TH AR E W RONG.
IT IS L IK E A G R E A T B A L L O F F IR E .8
但形文彩。即屬染汚。
夜半正明。天陡不露〇
為物作則。用抜諸苦。
雖非有為。不是無語0
EX PR ES SED IN L IT E R A R Y TE R M S ,
IT IS S M E A R E D A N D S M IR C H E D .
A T M ID N IG H T IT IS B R IG H T ,
IN T H E D A W N IT IS D A R K .
FO R T H E S A K E O F A L L B E IN G S IT BE C O M E S
1. These similes illustrate the truth of the sameness and dif
ference of all things.
2. This is a dangerous half-truth. The meaning is not in the
words, but neither is it in things or actions. As Goethe says,
“ Things are themselves the meaning,” and we may add, “ When
the words are real words, the words are themselves the meaning.”
3. If you get near it (Buddha, The Law, Things, Reality) you
will be burnt to death; if you go away from it you are frozen to
death.
154 The Hokyozammai
TH E L A W ;
IT S F U N C T IO N IS TO R E M O V E A L L T H E
T R O U B L E IN T H E W O R LD .
T H O U G H IT IS N O T O F T H IS W O R LD OF
B IR T H A N D D E A T H ,
N E IT H E R IS IT W IT H O U T W O R D S.45 6
如臨寶鏡。形影相親。
汝不是渠。渠正是汝。
如世嬰児。五相完具。
不去不来。不起不住。
婆婆啪聊。有句無句。
終不得物。語未正故。
A S W H E N W E L O O K IN A P R E C IO U S M IR R O R ,
T H E FO R M SEES IT S R E F L E C T IO N .
Y O U A R E N O T H E ,B
B U T H E IS Y O U .
IT IS L IK E A B A B Y C O M P LE T E W IT H T H E
F IV E SENSE O R G A N S .
IT C A N N O T GO OR C O M E,
C A N N O T S T A N D U P , C A N N O T S IT .
“ PO, PO, H O , H O !” IT S A Y S ,
IN W O RD S T H A T A R E N O T W O RDS.
WE CAN， T U N D E R S T A N D W H A T IT ’S T A L K IN G
ABO U T,
FO R IT S W O RD S A R E F A R F R O M A C C U R A T E .
重離六爻。偏正回互。
畳而為三。変尽為五。
如蓥草味。如金剛杵。
T H E S IX L IN E S O F T H E C H U N G L I H E X A G O N ,
S H O W IN G IN T E R D E P E N D E N C E ,
W H E N O V E R L A ID , T H E V A R IA T IO N S AR E
TH R E E
W H IC H TR AN SFO R M TH EM SELVE S IN T O
F IV E ,8 P ,
L IK E T H E G R ASS C A L L E D C H I, W H IC H H A S
4. All things, even words, speak of It.
5. The form is not its reflection, but the reflection is (that
of) the form.
6. I don't understand this.
The Hokyozammai 155
F IV E D IF F E R E N T T A S T E S ,
L IK E T H E V A J R A O F V A IR O C A N A .T
正中妙挾。敲唱雙挙。
通宗通途0 挾帯■ 〇
錯然則吉。
IN T H E M ID D L E , T H E R E IS A M A R V E L L O U S
U N IV E R S A L IT Y
C O M IN G O U T F R O M T E A C H IN G A N D L E A R N
IN G .
FO R T H E A IM A N D IT S M E A N S ,
IT IS GOO D TO B E R E S P E C T F U L A N D M O D E S T.
不可犯忤。天真而妙。
不属迷悟。因縁時節。
寂然照著。細入無間。
大絶方所。毫忽之差。
不JS律呂。
DO N O T O PPO SE IT .
IT S P U R IT Y AND U N C H A N G E A B IL IT Y IS
W O N D E R F U L.
IT B E LO N G S N E IT H E R TO E N L IG H T E N M E N T
N O R TO IL L U S IO N .
W H E N K A R M A A N D T H E T IM E M A T U R E , IT
Q U IE T L Y A P P E A R S ,789
IN S M A L L T H IN G S IT IS B O U N D LE S S .
IN T H E G R E A T IT IS U N L IM IT E D B Y D IR E C
T IO N A N D P L A C E .
TH E S L IG H T E S T D IF F E R E N C E , A N D TH E
H A R M O N Y IS S P O IL E D .
今有頓漸。緑立宗趣。
宗趣分★。即是規矩〇
宗通趣窮。真常流注。
N O W A D A Y S T H E R E IS T H E S U D D E N , A N D T H E
G R A D U A L S C H O O L.
7. Which may be single, like a septre, or five-pronged or nine-
pronged. W e are reminded here of the doctrine of the Trinity.
8. In active phenomena.
9. Supporters.
156 The Hokyozammai
T H E SEC T IS SET U P , A N D D IV ID E S IT S E L F ,
A C C O R D IN G TO IT S T E A C H IN G M E TH O D S .
T H E SECT IS P E R V A S IV E , A N D T H E F E A TU R E S
C O M P LE T E ,
A N D T R U T H F LO W S O U T E N D L E S S L Y .
外寂内動。繫駒伏鼠。
先聖悲之。為法檀度。
H O W E V E R , T H E R E IS S T IL L N E S S W IT H O U T ,
B U T A G IT A T IO N W IT H IN ,
L IK E A T E T H E R E D H O R SE, OR A R A T U N D ER
A TUB.
T H E S A IN T S O F O LD G R IE V E D A T T H IS ,
A N D B E C A M E P A R IS H IO N E R S 9 O F T H E L A W .
随其顚倒。以緇為素。
顚倒想滅。肯心自許。
要合古轍。請観前古。
仏道垂成。十劫観樹。
如虎之缺。如馬之扉。
B Y T H IS IN V E R S IO N 1011O F T H IN G S , B L A C K B E
C O M ES W H IT E 11.
W H E N IT IS D E S TR O Y E D , A C C E P T A N C E 1231 IS
AS S U R E D
IF Y O U W A N T TO W A L K T H E O LD E N W A Y ,1*
I U R G E Y O U TO M E D IT A T E O N T H E W IS D O M
OF TH E PAST.
TO B E C O M E A B U D D H A 14
B Y M IL L IO N S O F Y E A R S O F T R E E -G A Z IN G ,15
IT IS L IK E A D IS F IG U R E D T IG E R ,16 OR A
H O B B L E D HO R SE.
以有下劣。宝几珍御。
10. Illusion.
11. Good (the colour of the monk’s clothes) becomes bad (the
colour of ordinary people’s clothes).
12. Of truth.
13. Thoreau says, “ Turn to the old; return to them. Things
do not change; we change.”
14. In the case, for example, of Mahabhinjna Jnanabhibhu.
15. Looking at the Tree of Knowledge.
The Hokydzammai 157
以有驚異。S i奴白牯。
羿以功力。射中百歩。
箭鋒相値。功力何預。
A S T H E R E A R E L O W A N D V U L G A R T H IN G S ,
SO T H E R E A R E TR E A S U R E S A N D R A R IT IE S ;
A S T H E R E A R E A S T O U N D IN G A N D Q U EER
T H IN G S ,
SO T H E R E A R E C A T S A N D W H IT E COW S.
I, B Y H IS M A G IC PO W ER , C O U LD H IT A T A R G E T
A H U N D R ED PACES A W A Y ;
T H E P O IN T S O F TW O A R R O W S M E T IN M ID
A IR ,— W H A T A F E A T !
木人方歌。石女起舞。
非情識到。寧容思量。
T H E M A N O F W O O D S IN G S ,
T H E W O M A N O F STO N E G ETS UP AND
dances 17__
T H IS C A N N O T B E D O N E B Y P A S S IO N OR B Y
L E A R N IN G ,
IT C A N N O T B E D O N E B Y R E A S O N IN G .
臣奉於君。子順於父。
不順非孝0 不奉非輔0
潜行密用。如愚如魯。
但能相続。名主中主。
A R E T A IN E R SE R VES H IS L O R D ;
A C H IL D O B E Y S H IS F A T H E R .
W IT H O U T O B E D IE N C E , T H E R E IS N O F A IT H
F U LN E S S ;
W IT H O U T S E R V IC E T H E R E IS N O R E T A IN E R -
S H IP .
A S P L E N D ID A C T IO N , A M Y S T E R IO U S U SE ,—
T H IS IS B E IN G L IK E A F O O L, L IK E A B O O B Y .7 611
16. It was said that a tiger which injured a man had a blemish
in its ears.
17 . For the wooden man to sing or the stone woman to dance,
all that is necessary is to perform perfectly the ordinary tasks of
life and maintain the natural relations between one person
another.
158 The Hokyozammai
TO C O N T IN U E T H IS W O R K IS TO B E A M A S T E R
A M O N G M A S TE R S .
T h is k in d o f th in g can h a rd ly be fo u n d in E n g lish
re lig io u s lite ra tu re . I t re m in d s us o f th e T ib e ta n B ook
o f th e D ead, o r th e re lig io u s w ritin g s o f a n c ie n t A ssyria ,
o r o f th e gnostics; o f S w edenborg, Boehm e, and the
p ro p h e tic a l w o rk s o f B la ke . T h e re is no Zen in it.
Chapter X X
THE POEMS OF HANSHAN I
I t is perhaps n o t possible to have a c le a r p ic tu re o f

H anshan (K a n z a n ).1 W as he a Taoist? a B u d d h ist? a
Zen m onk? an eccentric? a n a tu ra l? a T im o n o f A thens?
a poseur? o r a lit t le o f each? T he Japanese have
tu rn e d h im in to a k in d o f Zen m adm an, and a rtis ts
especially, fo r e xam ple M in c h o ,明兆， In d ra ，因陀羅,
L ia n g k ‘a i,梁楷， show h im to g e th e r w ith S h ih td as a
couple o f p o e tic a l lu n a tic s , w ith m a tte d h a ir and a
p e rp e tu a l g rin on th e ir faces. T h is aspect o f H anshan
has its o rig in in th e P re face to th e Poem s o f H anshan
w ritte n b y L iic h ‘iu y in ,閬丘胤，o f w ho m no m ore is k n o w n ,
h is to ric a lly , th a n in th e case o f H anshan h im s e lf. H e
says he was p e rs o n a lly a cq u a in te d w ith H anshan, S h ih te ,
and F engkan. F en gka n w as head p rie s t o f K u o ch *in g
Tem ple in T ie n tâ i (T e n d a i) M o u n ta in s, and H anshan
and S h ih te o fte n v is ite d th e te m p le and w e re on v e ry
good te rm s w ith F engkan, th o u g h n o t a lw a ys w ith
the o th e r m onks, w h o o fte n d ro v e th e m aw ay. S h ih te ,
whose nam e m eans "p ic k e d u p /* w as an o rp h a n , and
as a b ab y was p icke d up b y F en gka n and g iv e n to
someone to re a r h im . S h ih te w as fa r fro m b e in g a poet,
b u t w ro te verses; th e fo llo w in g is an exam ple :
寒山自寒山，拾得自拾得，凡愚豈見知，豊干却相識，
見時不可見，覔時何処覔。借間有何縁，向道無為力。
H anshan is o f h im s e lf H anshan;
S h ih te is o f h im s e lf S h ih te .
H ow can th e com m on o r garden m an re a lly k n o w
them ?
1. In this chapter the Chinese name is given first, as belonging
to Chinese literature. In the other chapters, the Japanese pro
nunciation is used, for it is the Japanese who have preserved Zen.
160 Hanshan
(B u t Feng kn ow s th em th ro u g h and th ro u g h .)
I f yo u w a n t re a lly to see th e m y o u m u s tn ’t ju s t
lo o k a t them .
W hen yo u w a n t to fin d th em , w h e re w ill yo u seek
fo r them ?
I ask, “ W h a t is th e re la tio n betw een th em ? ”
A n d hasten to answ er, “ T h e y a re m en w ith th e
om n ip o ten ce o f d o in g ‘n o th in g .’ ”
F engkan also w ro te verses, o f an e q u a lly m y s tic a l

ch a ra cte r, fo r exam ple :
寒山特相訪，拾得罕期来，論心話明月，
大虚廓無礙，法界即無辺，一法普徧該。
H anshan cam e s p e c ia lly to see m e,

S h ih te too, a ra re v is ito r.
W e spoke u n a ffe c te d ly and w ith o u t rese rve o f the
M in d ,
H ow va st and fre e th e G re a t E m ptiness,
H ow boundless th e u n ive rse ,
Each th in g c o n ta in in g w ith in its e lf a ll th in g s.
T he poem s o f S h ih te and F en gka n a re u s u a lly p rin te d

to g e th e r w ith those o f H anshan.
T he fam ous p o e t-m o n k C h 'a n y iie h (Z engetsu) 832-
912, speaks o f H anshan in a poem sent to S hutaoshih,
舒道士，o f C h‘ih s u n g ,赤松，w h ic h is fa ir ly near M o u n t
T ‘ie n t‘a i. T h is suggests th a t H anshan m ust belong to
about th e 8 th c e n tu ry A .D . T ‘ie n t‘a i, th e h ig h e st peak
o f w h ic h is abo ut 180,000 fe e t, is th e m ost re m a rka b le
g ro up o f m o u n ta in s in S o u th -E a st C hina. I t was used
b y B u dd h ists. In th e 6 th c e n tu ry T 'ie n t^ I stu d ie d B u d
d hism th e re , and Zen a t K u och *ing T em ple, fre q u e n te d
b y H anshan. T h is te m p le , b y th e w ay, s till exists, and
th e th re e , H anshan, S h ite , and F engkan a re aw o r-
sh ip pe d ” th e re . The in flu e n c e o f T ‘ie n t‘a i upon H anshan
m ust have been g re a t; Taoism , B u dd h ism , and Zen are
a lm ost e q u a lly m in g le d in h im . In th is re g io n also
in th e 8 th c e n tu ry , N anyueh (N a n g a ku ) 677-744, and
M atsu ( B a s o ) 馬祖，709-788, w ere e xe rc is in g a g reat
Mountains 161
in flu e n ce in th e flo u ris h in g S o uthe rn S chool o f Z « i.

The prevalence of Zen in the poetry of Hanshan is seen
in the fact that by the end of the T*ang dynasty, it was
being read in Zen temples everywhere. In Japan also,
where commentaries were written from the Edo Period,
these were all by Zen priests. Haktiin Zenji wrote a
Zen com 讲entary, jSenfeifcimon，闡提記聞， which treats
Hanshan^ poems as thotigh he were a Zen master.
There are 314 poems in the largest edition of Han-
shan，s poetry. They have no titles, and the order is
different. How many are Hanshan’s we may ask, but
we may say the same thing of the sutras and the gospels.
Some of the verses are Buddhistic, some Buddhistically
moralistic, some moralistic without the Buddhism, some
of practical and worldly advice.
Hanshan is the name of a mountain; it is the name
of a man who lived there; it is the Godhead which
Wordsworth also perceived, but to the English poet
mountains are at once more homely, more sexual, more
fearful, more personal. The Chinese poet’s mountain
is more inward, more inexpressive, more Eckhartian,
more transcendental. To be noted is the way in which
Hanshan used his own name as a kind of first person
singular. This is unknown in Chinese poetry, and also
in Buddhist or Zen verses.
It may be interesting to compare Hanshan with some
other English poets. Christopher Smart had the religion
and the insanity, but not Hanshan’s kind of mysticism.
Perhaps Blake’s “madness” in the closest to Hanshan’s
alleged preposterousness, but there is a human joy in
Blake which contrasts with the rarefaction, isolation,
and other-worldliness of Hanshan. Clare’s love of
nature in its minute variety, and hatred of (Words
worth^) mysticism distinguish him distinctly from
Hanshan, but they are alike in misanthropy and failure
to be loved by women. This was also the case with
Thoreau, who has the same perversity but not the
eccentricity, uncouthness, deliberate mystification and
Kanzan and Jittoku
On the right is Kanzan, reading his own

poems:
吟詩不知調看經不解義
Reciting the verses, he does not know the tune;
R eading th e su tra s, he can’t e x p la in th e m eaning.
The tune cannot be separated from the

notes; the meaning cannot be divided from
the words.
On the left is Jittoku:
支帚不除塵指月不忘指
Leaning on the broom, he does not remove the dust;
Pointing at the moon, he does not forget the finger.
The broom has an absolute value. As

Wilde said, “ All (art) is useless•” The finger
and the moon (and the broom) are ends, not
means. Indeed, the pointing finger is in a
way superior to the moon of truth it points
at.
162 Hanshan
wanton wilfulness we sometimes feel in Hanshan.

Cowper’s madness has not Hanshan’s Chinese toughness
of fibre which enabled him (at times) to “overcome the
world.” Cowper was too sensitive for this, Christ also.
A certain amount of (womanly) poise, the insensitivity
of nature, the “enlightenment” of Zen is necessary not
merely for the lowest, but for the highest life. A super
sensitive God would go out of his mind; perhaps He
has.
The following are the most poetical of Hanshan’s
verses, and (therefore) those with most Zen in them.
They are in a kind of chronological order.
父母続継多田園不羡他婦摇機軋々

児弄口« 々拍手催花舞稽頤聴鳥歌
誰当来嘆賞樵客屢経過
My mother and father left me enough to live on,
I have no need to grudge others their lands and
fields.
My wife works at the loom; creak! creak ! it goes.
My children prattle and play;
Clapping their hands, they dance with the flowers,
They listen to the song of the birds, chin on hand.
Who comes to pay his respects?
A woodcutter, occasionally.
This seems to have been written before Hanshan left

his home to become a wanderer, until he settled at
Hanshan, the Cold Mountain from which he took his
name. Such an earthly paradise as he describes here
is not possible in this world. Heaven is a room for
one person.
茅楝野人居門前車馬疎林幽偏聚鳥

谿濶本蔵魚山果携児摘皐田共婦鋤
家中何所有唯有一床書
Beams with a thatch over them,—a wild man’s
dwelling !
Before my gate pass horses and carts seldom enough;
Misanthropy 163
The lonely wood gathers birds;
The broad valley stream harbours fish;
With my children I pluck the wild fruits of the
trees;
My wife and I hoe the rice-field;
What is there in my house?
A single case of books.
This also is Hanshan’s pre-Robinson Crusoe life. It

is exactly the same as that of Toemmei. It is the ideal
life of every man; ideal, not real, not realisable.
我在村中住衆推無比方昨日到城下

仍被狗形相或嫌袴太窄或説衫少長
撐却鷂子眼雀児舞堂堂。
I live in a village;
And everybody praises me to the skies,
But yesterday I went to the town.
Even the dog watched me suspiciously;
The people don’t like the cut of my coat,
Or my trousers are too long or too short for them.
If an eagle is struck blind,
The sparrows fly openly.
The real difference between the town and the village
is not so much that the villagers are all trusting and
true-hearted fellows, and the townsfolk mean and
suspicious, but that the town is bigger than the village.
We cannot be known in a crowd. The point of the
last two lines seems to be that Hanshan has no economic
or social power, and the townsfolk behave to him like
the vulgar and stupid people they are. We are irre
sistibly reminded of Kierkegaard.
昔時可可貧今朝最貧凍作事不諧和

触途成倥儒【行泥屢脚屈坐社頻腹痛
失却班猫児老鼠囲飯甕。
I was pretty poor before,

Today I am wretchedness and misery itself.
Everything is at sixes and sevens.
164 Hanshan
I meet suffering everywhere I go.

I often slip about on the muddy roads;
I get belly-ache when I sit with my neighbours.
When the tabby cat is lost,
Rats occupy the rice-chest.
Kanzan here shows us his grumbling Zen. On some

days everything goes wrong, and life hardly seems
worth living; energy (sexual?) is at a low ebb. How
ever, it is not that some days must be dark and gloomy.
It is that darkness and gloom are good in themselves,
not as contrasted with bright and cheerful days, nor as
a chance for resignation. It is rather
The Devils in Hell,

All’s wrong with the world !
一人好頭肚六藝尽皆通南見趁向北

西見趁向東長漂如汎萍不息似飛蓬
問是何等色姓貧名曰窮。
Here’s a fine chap, strong in mind and body,

He has the Six Accomplishments;
But when he goes South he’s driven North,
And when he goes West he’s sent away East,
Always floating like duckweed,
Like “flying grass,” never at rest.
You ask, “What kind of man may this be?”
His surname is Poverty; the first name is Extremity.
The last line reminds us of the Rich Young Ruler in
reverse. The Six Accomplishments are: deportment,
music, archery, horsemanship, calligraphy, mathematics.
昨夜夢還郷見婦機中織
駐梭若有思擎梭似無力
呼之廻面視怳復不相識
怎是別多年癀毛非旧色。
Last night I dreamed I was back home again,

And was looking at my wife weaving.
She stopped the loom, and seemed deep in thought,
Nostalgia 165
And as though she had not the strength to begin
again.
I called to her and she looked up at me,
But did not recognise me, and stared vacantly.
The years are many since we parted,
And my hair is not the colour it used to be.
This poem would not ordinarily be quoted as an
example of Zen, but I wish to take it so. Zen is not
medicine for the spiritually afflicted, nor a tonic for
the potential hero. It is
Something not too bright or good

For human nature’s daily foo3.
Hanshan has a yearning for his old life. His dream is
a clear example of Freud’s “wish-fulfilment.” And this
is as it should be, because it is as it is. Illusion is (a
form of) enlightenment. To forgive (one’s own erring)
is divine.
Chapter XXI
THE POEMS OF HANSHAN II
Hanshan, like every other man, and especially a

poet, is more unexpected, more varied than we suppose.
He was not always a hermit, and not always a man of
the world. To put it more clearly, he was always a
hermit, always a man of the world. So we find mingled
in his writings poems of ambition and of profundity,
of wit and of anguish, of no Zen and of Zen. He has
something of Hamlet about him.
城中蛾眉女珠珮河珊々鸚鵡花前弄

琵琶月下弾長歌三月響短舞万人看
未必長如此芙蓉不耐寒。
In the citadel there is a beautiful lady;

The pearls at her waist tinkle silverly.
Among the flowers she dandles a parrot,
And plays the lute under the moon.
The long tones of her song still linger after three
months;
The short dance,—all come to see.
But this will not continue forever;
The lotus flower cannot bear the frost.
In the last word of the poem,寒，cold, the first half
of Hanshan’s name, it is not perhaps fanciful to see
a reference to his own way of living as compared with
that of the beautiful lady. Bunyan’s “He that is low
need fear no fall” is also Hanshan’s motto.
吾家好隠淪居処絶嚣塵践草成三径

瞻雲為四隣助歌声有鳥問法語無人
今曰娑婆樹為年為一春。
Nature 167
I live in a nice place,
Far from dust and bustle.
By treading the turf, I have three paths;
The clouds I see I make my four walls.
To help Nature express itself there are the voices
of birds;
Here there is nobody to ask about Buddhist
philosophy.
The Tree of the World is still growing;
My short span of spring,—how many years will it
be?
This is the ideal life, but even here there is a
pervasive melancholy.
可笑寒山路而無車馬蹤聯溪難記曲

畳障不知重泣露千般草吟風一様松
此時迷径処形問影何從。
The way to Hanshan is a queer one;

No ruts or hoof-prints are seen.
Valley winds into valley,
Peak rises above peak;
Grasses are bright with dew,
And pine-trees sough in the breeze.
Even now you do not know?
The reality is asking the shadow the way.
The last lines, as usual, are suddenly difficult. The
meaning is perhaps that the reality is ourselves, and
it is useless to question outward things, these “vanish-
ings,” for the reality. “Hanshan” is of course the
mountain, the man, and reality.
閑自訪髙僧烟山万々層
師親指帰路月挂一輪澄。
Quietly I visited a famous monk;
Mountains rose one after another through the mist.
The master pointed out my way back;
The moon, a circle of light, hung in the sky.
The journey, the mountains, the mist, the way home,
168 Hanshan
and the moon have some obscure mystical meaning.

The monk would be perhaps at Tientai, twenty-five
miles from Mount Han.
重巖我卜居鳥道絶人跡庭際何所有

白雲抱幽石住玆凡幾年屢見春冬易
寄語鐘鼎家虚名定無益。
I dwell below boulders piled one upon another.

A path fit for birds ! It only prevents people from
coming.
The garden,—can you call it a garden?
The white clouds embrace ineffable rocks;
How long have I lived among them all?
How many times have I seen spring depart, seen
winter come again?
But avoid the dinner bell and banquets galore,
Beware of names empty and profitless.
The last two lines are as usual what old Mr. Weller
would have called “a sudden pull-up.”
家住緑巖下庭蕪更不芟
新藤垂繚鐃古石豎巉巖
山果獼猴摘池魚白麓銜
仙書一両卷樹下読喃々。
My hut is beneath a green cliff,

The garden a wilderness;
The latest creepers hang down in coils and twinings,
Ancient rocks stand sharp and tall.
Monkeys come and pick the wild fruits;
The white heron swallows the fish of the pools.
Under the trees I read some Taoist books;
My voice intones the words and phrases.
This is both ideal and real, like Thoreau’s life at
Walden, but has a faint undertone of something else
in it, however skilfully hidden.
憶得二十年徐歩国清帰国清寺中人

尽道寒山癡癡人何用疑疑不解尋思
A Fool 169
我尙自不識是伊争得知低頭不用問

問得復何為有人来罵我分明了々知
雖然不JS対郤是得便宜。
These past twenty years !—thinking of them,

How I have walked quietly back from Kuoch^ng
Temple,
And all the people of the temple.
Say of Hanshan, “What a nincompoop he is !’’
Why do they call me a fool, I wonder?
But I can’t decide the question,
For I myself don’t know who “I” is,
So how can others possibly know?
I hang my head; whafs the use of their asking?
What good can thinking about it do?
People come and laugh at me.
I know quite well what they think of me,
But I am not foolish enough to retort to them,
Because they do just what I want them to do.
This reminds tis of Blake^ P ro v e r b s o f H ell:
Listen to the fool’s reproach ! It is a kingly title!
And this is not to be taken in a cynical or scornful

way but more philosophically. It takes a great man
to know a great man, and a fool sees only fools. If
a fool saw a wise man as wise the wise man would
be a fool.
荘子説送終天地為棺槨凡帰此有時
唯須一番箔死将锸青蠅弔不労白鶴
餓著首陽山生廉死亦楽。
Chuangtse told us about his funeral,

How Heaven and Earth would be his coffin.
There is a time to die,
And just one hurdle will do.
Dead, I shall be the food of blow-flies;
I won’t give white cranes the trouble of mourning
for me.
To starve on Mount Shouyang,—
Ifs a gallant life, a joyful death.
170 Hanshan
In the Chapter entitled 列禦寇， we are told that when
Chuangtse was about to die his disciples met and dis
cussed what kind of funeral they should give him.
Chuangtse said,
M y co ffin w ill be H eaven and E a rth ; fo r th e fu n e ra l

ornam ents o f jad e, th e re a re th e Sun and M oon; fo r
m y p e a rls and je w e ls , I s h a ll have th e S tars and
C o n s te lla tio n s ; a ll th in g s w ill be m y m ou rn ers. Is
n o t e v e ry th in g re a d y fo r m y b u ria l? W h a t should
be added to this?
I t w o u ld n o t be easy to d efend H anshan fro m the

charge o f b eing b o th a m is a n th ro p is t and m iso gyn ist.
H e h im s e lf says in one o f h is poem s:
本将兄共居，縁遭他輩責，
剰被自妻疎。
I liv e d w ith m y o ld e r b ro th e r,
B u t I was tre a te d c ru e lly b y m y n eighbours,
M oreo ver, I was neglected b y m y w ife .
H anshan says th a t “ anyone w ho w an ts to read m y poems

m u st keep h is m in d p u re ,” 凡読我詩者，心中須護浄• In the
same poem H anshan says th a t “ to a tta in e n lig h te n m e n t
to da y, w e m ust be a s w ift as th e J u lin g D em on,” 今曰得仏
身，急々如律令. The J u lin g D em on is said to be th e same
as th e T h u n d e r S p irit, and th u s H anshan is te llin g us
to be as g e n tle as doves and as w ise as serpents, fo r
Zen w isdo m consists in b e in g too q u ic k to a llo w th o u g h t
and em o tion to assert th e ir independence. H anshan
had n o t a v e ry h ig h o p in io n o f th e average m an, and
e sp e cia lly p o e try he fe lt to be above h is head. “ I f you
w rite a poem on a ric e -c a k e , even a s tra y dog w on ,t
eat it . ” O f h im s e lf, and h is ideals, he says:
人問寒山路寒山路不通
夏天氷未釈日出霧朦朧。
A Zen-less Zen 171
P eople ask th e w a y to H anshan,

B u t th e re is no w a y to H anshan.
The ice does n o t m e lt even in sum m er,
A n d even i f th e sun sh ou ld ris e , dense va po urs
c lo th e i t ro u n d .
A s in K a fk a , th e road, th e w a y, T he W ay, is uN o
T h o ro u g h fa re V9 H anshan, as said a t th e b e g in n in g , is
a v e ry m ix e d ch a ra cte r. H is Zen is m in g le d w ith a
s p irit o f despair, even d esperation, w h ic h is th e a n ti
thesis o f Zen. B u t as T ho rea u says, i t is w ro n g to
system atise o u r th o u g h t and o u r experience. L e t i t be
as i t is, c o n tra d ic tio n s and a ll, and w e s h a ll th e n becom e
even m ore re a l, m ore hum an th a n H a m le t and H anshan.
Chapter X X II
ZEN, MYSTICISM, AND EXISTENTIALISM
O f these th re e , e x is te n tia lis m has th e m ost Zen, I

w o u ld say. T h is sta te m e n t suggests tw o th in g s , firs t,
th a t “ Z en” is v e ry d iffic u lt to use w ith a s in g le m ean
in g ; second, th a t h o w e ve r m uch I m ay speak i l l o f
(o th e r people’s) Zen, and indeed to th a t e x te n t, i t is
“ y e t th e fo u n ta in lig h t o f a ll o u r day, A m a s te r-lig h t
o f a ll o u r seeing.”
(W o rld ) m y s tic is m is th e expe rie nce o f an e ve r
p resent, a b o rig in a l oneness. I t is th e re u n io n o f th e I
and th e n o t-I. (C hinese) Zen, in its h is to ric a l o rig in s
in th e U panishads, and fo r Laotse and C huangtse, is
th e same; o n ly in its m ethod, its s ty le , is i t d is s im ila r,
and o f course a d iffe re n c e o f s ty le is a d iffe re n c e o f
essence. (E u ro p e a n ) e x is te n tia lis m is th e experience
o f th e e te rn a l se pa ra tion o f th e I, n o t fro m th e n o t-I,
b u t fro m th e P e rson al A b s o lu te th a t stands outside
b o th .
M y s tic is m is a re -u n io n o f th e in d iv id u a l soul w ith
th e O v e r-s o u l. Its m a rk is jo y ; i t grasps E te rn ity fo r
o n ly s h o rt tim es. Zen also is an id e n tific a tio n (to g e th e r
w ith an e q u a lly “ re a l” se p a ra tio n ) o f th e s e lf and
th e S e lf, and th us e n lig h te n m e n t is th e same e n lig h te n
m e n t fo r e ve ryb o d y ( in sp ite o f th e alleged “ separa
tio n .”） Its m a rk is peace o f m in d , and th e E te rn a l is
now , o r n ever. E x is te n tia lis m is, w e m ust suppose,
d iffe re n t fo r e v e ry person; even i f i t is th e same, w e
have no w a y o f e x p e rie n c in g th e fa c t. Its m a rk is
anguish, w h ic h is n e v e r-e n d in g , fo r th e re la tiv e cannot
re a lly grasp th e absolute, and y e t i t is som ehow
“ a b s o lu te ly ” bound to tr y to do so.
A Personal God 173
M y s tic is m has no th o u g h t. I t is p u re sensation ap

p lie d to th e D iv in e . A l-G h a z z a li, a P e rsia n m y s tic o f
th e 1 1 th c e n tu ry , w ro te in h is a u to b io g ra p h y, “ T he
tra n s p o rt w h ic h one a tta in s b y th e m eth od o f th e S ufis
is lik e an im m e d ia te p e rce p tio n , as i f one touched th e
objects w ith one， s h a n d .” In Zen w e th in k and th in k
u n til th o u g h t is c o n fro n te d w ith th e abyss o f U n
th o u g h t, and w e th e n ju m p in to th a t abyss. E x is te n tia l
ism is s im ila r, b u t th e th in k in g n e v e r stops. “ I f th e
Sun and M oon sh o u ld d o u b t, T h e y ’d im m e d ia te ly Go
O u t,” says B la k e th e m y s tic . In e x is te n tia lis m th e sun
and m oon are a lw a ys flic k e rin g , g u tte rin g . D ea th and
re s u rre c tio n a re sim u ltan e ou s and endless. M y s tic is m
is an e xpe rie nce o f allness, Zen o f th is -th in g -n e s s . O n ly
e x is te n tia lis m is m odest enough to say th a t th e existen ce
o f an A b s o lu te a t th e back o f a ll th e re la tiv e s is n o t
som ething th a t can be k n o w n , and th a t o u r se p a ra tio n
fro m God is repeated in o u r e q u a lly a b so lu te se p a ra tio n
fro m each o th e r.
One d e fe ct o f Zen is its la c k o f p e rs o n a lity , and o f
P e rs o n a lity . Z en nists m ake fu n , in v e ry p o o r ta ste, o f
a person al God and o f an in d iv id u a l so ul. I m y s e lf
b e lie ve in n e ith e r, b u t th e re is n o th in g lu d ic ro u s in
th e ide a th a t p e rs o n a lity , h u m a n o r d iv in e , is th e h ig h e s t
fo rm o f b e in g w e can conceive. F ifty m illio n Jew s
can’t be w ro n g . In a c tu a l fa c t, n o t o n ly w e, b u t e v e ry
th in g else is p e rso n a l. I f th e I is p e rso n a l, so is th e
n o t-I, fo r i t is th e u n iv e rs e w h ic h is th u s chopped in to
tw o ; a n im is m is th e essence o f a ll tru e p o e try and
re lig io n . T h is o f course has n o th in g to do w ith th e im
m o rta lity o f th e soul, o r a d iv in ity th a t shapes o u r ends.
Since Zen, m y s tic is m , and e x is te n tia lis m a re fo rm s
o f e xperience, th e cla im s o f a ll th re e m u s t be conceded,
fo r re a l e xp e rie n ce is in fa llib le . A ll th re e w o u ld say
th a t, n o t in s p ite o f, b u t ra th e r because o f th e c o n tra d ic
tio n s o f e xpe rie nce , i t m u s t be b e lie ve d . H o w e ve r, th e
in te lle c t s h o u ld n o t be fo rg o tte n . I t is th e in te lle c t
w h ic h te lls us th a t th e m om en t these th re e step beyond
174 Zen, Mysticism, Existentialism
e xpe rie nce in to e x p la n a tio n o r syn the sis o r a n a lysis o r
p ro o f and d is p ro o f, w e sh o u ld n o t m e re ly re fu s e to
accept i t b u t d e cla re th a t i t is n o t o n ly n o t tru e , b u t
fa lse. In th e w o rld o f p o e try (a n d p o e try is th e com
m on e le m e n t o f Zen, m y s tic is m , and e x is te n tia lis m )
com m onsense ju d g e m e n ts a re n o t s im p ly in v a lid ; th e
m ore th e y a re r ig h t th e m ore th e y a re w ro n g .
Zen, w ith its tw e n ty -e ig h t In d ia n p a tria rc h s and a
lin e o f “ m in d to m in d ” c o n tin u in g d ow n to th e pre sen t
day, has p e rsiste d fo r 2,500 years, 3,000, i f w e in c lu d e
p re -B u d d h is tic H in d u is m — u nchanged; h ow can w e
im p ro v e on N irv a n a ? T he m yste rie s— p a n to m im ic
E g y p tia n , o ffic ia l E le u syn ia n , o rg ia s tic O rp h ic , gushing
P h ry g ia n , m ilita ris tic M ith ra ic — w e re a ll p riv a te and
in d iv id u a l, n o t p u b lic and so cial. In de ed , i f m an is
a so cia l a n im a l, th e m y s tic is n o t a m an. L a te r came
th e m y s tic is m o f th e M o n ta n is ts ; th e G nostics; th e N eo-
p la to n is ts ; th e 13th c e n tu ry B eghards and B eguines; th e
14th c e n tu ry B re th re n o f th e F re e S p irit; th e F rie n d s
o f G od, u n d e r E c k h a rt, T a u le r, and Suso; th e 16th
c e n tu ry C h ris tia n K a b a lis ts ; th e 17th c e n tu ry P h ila d e l
phians, th e R an te rs, Seekers, M u g g le to n ia n s, F a m ily o f
L ove , th e L e v e lle rs , th e D ig g e rs; th e C am bridge
P la to n is ts ; th e 18th c e n tu ry M a rtin is ts ; th e Q u ie tis ts ;
th e M o ra v ia n B re th re n , th e R o sicru cia n s; th e D u k h o -
b o rts y , n o t to speak o f th e H a sid ists, D u n ke rs, B ahaists,
and so on. In s p ite o f a ll these, m y s tic is m has in i t
som e thin g u n -in te g ra tin g , w h ic h , m o re th a n its h e re tic a l
“ d o c trin e s ,” has a lw a ys m ade i t suspect to th e C a th o lic
C hu rch . E x is te n tia lis m is p o s itiv e d is in te g ra tio n ,
a na rch y, ( c iv il) disobedience. “ S ouls a re n o t saved in
b un dles.” （T he ) Zen (se ct) w ill one d a y d isappear;
as S h aka m un i th e fir s t Z e n n is t said on h is death-b ed ,
“ A ll th e c o n stitu e n ts o f b e in g a re tra n s ito ry .”
M y s tic is m is a lre a d y p ra c tic a lly n o n -e x is te n t. O n ly
e x is te n tia lis m gam bles on its in c o n s e q u e n tia lity , its
Uniqueness, its d is c o n tin u ity , on its v e ry la c k o f suc
cession; e x is te n tia lis m alone w ill co n tin u e , o r n o t.
Suffering 175
W hen w e th in k o f th e nam es m en tion ed in connec

tio n w ith e x is te n tia lis m _ K ie rk e g a a rd : “ I t is n o t a
d is tin g u is h in g q u a lity o f th e w a y th a t i t is h a rd , b u t
a d is tin g u is h in g q u a lity o f th e a fflic tio n th a t i t is th e
w a y ;” N ietzsche: “ M y o p in io n is m y o p in io n ; a n o th e r
person has n o t e a s ily a r ig h t to i t ; ” Jaspers: “ One does
n o t p ro ve Transcendence, one bears w itn e ss to i t ; ”
M a rce l: “ Esse est co-esse;” S a rtre : “ M y d ea th is th e
one m om ent o f m y life I do n o t h ave to liv e ;’’
H eidegger: “ G rie f separated fro m m ere m e la n c h o ly b y
a gap, is jo y w h ic h is se re n ifie d fo r th e M o st Joyous,
so lo n g as i t reserves its e lf and h e sita te s;^ to w ho m
some w o u ld add P ascal: “ T he I is h a te fu l;” D ostoe vsky:
“ A lw a y s and in e v e ry th in g I go to th e e xtre m e lim it;”
and K a fk a : “ T h in k o f m e as a d re a m ;” I w o u ld in c lu d e
T horeau: “ I say God- I am n o t sure th a t is th e nam e.
Y ou w ill k n o w w ho m I m ean;” 一 w h a t a m o tle y cre w !
A crew w ith o u t a sh ip.
(Z e n ) B u d d h ism is th e re lig io n o f (th e escape fro m )
s u ffe rin g . N irv a n a is a sta te beyond (p le a su re a nd )
pain. M y s tic is m also is th e d e sire fo r “ a repose th a t
ever is th e same,^ an escape fro m lo n e lin e ss. E x is te n tia l
ism , on th e c o n tra ry , is th e escaping fro m c o m fo rt and
tr a n q u illity o f m in d . I t is n o t m asochism , a t le a st in
th e o ry , fo r its a im is s u ffe rin g , n o t th e p le asu re o f
su ffe rin g . K ie rk e g a a rd says in h is J o u rn a l, 1853，“ To
lo ve God is to s u ffe r.” T he a im o f e x is te n tia lis m is to
re ig n , and to re ig n w ith H im w e m u s t s u ffe r w ith H im ,
b u t to s u ffe r is to re ig n , to re ig n is to s u ffe r. (O ne
o b liq u e p ro o f o f th e e xisten ce o f G od, w h ic h K ie rk e
gaard w o u ld h ave sneered a t, is : God is lo v e ; lo v e is
s u ffe rin g ; s u ffe rin g e xists, th e re fo re G od does.) In any
case, as fa r as s u ffe rin g is concerned, e x is te n tia lis m
w ins a ll hands d ow n, le a v in g Zen and m y s tic is m t r a il
in g fa r b e h in d w ith th e ir jo y o f e n lig h te n m e n t and
ecstasy o f u n io n .
Zen m a y be c a lle d th e re lig io n o f death, th e cessation
o f th e d e sire to e x is t. (P rim itiv e ) B u d d h ism , w ith its
176 Zen, M y stic ism , E x is te n tia lis m
d o c trin e o f n o -s o u l, ta u g h t th a t w e n e ve r re a lly liv e ;

w e o n ly th in k w e do, and w he n w e k n o w w e don t,
w h e n w e k n o w th a t w e a re n o t w e, and life is illu s io n ,
th is is N irv a n a . T he p o s itiv e side o f th is d o c trin e is
b ro u g h t o u t b y th e fo llo w in g . I once re ce ive d a le tte r
fro m D r. S u z u k i D aisetz. O n th e envelope m y nam e
was tra n s lite ra te d in to th re e C hinese c h a ra c te rs ,不来子，
P im ii-s h i，w h ic h also m eans, “ Y o u h ave n ’t come (to see
m e fo r a lo n g tim e ) ：9 B u t i t has fu rth e r a Zen m ean
in g , MM r N o t-c o m in g O ne,^ th a t is, (th e re a l) yo u has
n o t come, w ill n o t go; y o u ca nn ot die, because yo u are
a “ n o t-b o rn -p e rs o n •” M y s tic is m has th e same a ttitu d e .
I t is so enam oured o f tim eless life th a t i t “ n e ve r th in k s
o f a n y th in g less th a n dea th.” （H o w e ve r, th e “ d a rk
n ig h t o f th e so ul,” described b y M adam e G uyon, St.
Jo hn o f th e Cross, St. Theresa, and others, is th e fe a r
o f a th ird k in d o f death, s p iritu a l em ptiness.) The
e x is te n tia l a ttitu d e to (a n o th e r’s) dea th is th a t i t is
w h a t yo u m ake it. T h o rea u says, “ F rie n d s a re as o fte n
b ro u g h t n e a re r as separated b y d ea th.” Jaspers agrees
w ith h im . I t is m y fid e lity to a dead person w h ic h
m a in ta in s h is (o b je c tiv e ) e xistence ( fo r m e) ju s t as it
d id d u rin g h is life tim e . F o r K ie rk e g a a rd tru e p re p a ra
tio n fo r o ne ^ o w n death is death its e lf. H e says, in
C o n clud in g U nscie ntific P o stscript, uW e w is h to kn o w
h ow th e conception o f d eath w ill tra n s fo rm a m an’s
e n tire life , w he n in o rd e r to th in k its u n c e rta in ty he
has to th in k i t in e v e ry m om ent, so as to p re p a re h im
s e lf fo r i t " D eath is to S a rtre “ a c a n c e lla tio n alw ays
possible o f w h a t I can be, w h ic h is outsid e m y p o s s ib ili
tie s i t is s im p ly a fa c t, and th e fa te o f th e dead is in
th e hands o f th e liv in g . H eidegger, h ow eve r, says th a t
death is som ething w e have th e fre e re s o lu tio n to take
upon ourselves.
L o ve (as w e lea rn e d fro m B o rn Free, and L iv in g
Free) m eans m a k in g a n o th e r fre e , fre e in g others. L ove
is w a n tin g w h a t God w ants, th a t is, w h a t th e o the r
person re a lly , fre e ly w ants. T he lo v e o f tw o people is
Love 177
n o t, as P la to p re te n d e d , th e co m b in in g o f co m p le m e n ta ry
c h a ra c te ris tic s ; n o r does i t d e riv e fro m s im ila rity o f
ch a ra cte r o r tastes; i t is n o t th a t yo u lik e cats, o r Bach,
so do I ，so le t’s liv e to g e th e r. I t is n o t even W o rd s w o rth
and D o ro th y and th e g lo w w o rm , and “ O h ! jo y i t w as
fo r h e r and jo y fo r m e V9 L o v e is th e u n b re a ka b le
re la tio n b etw e en fa ith and fa ith fu ln e s s . T he m an says,
“ I am an e x is te n tia lis t.” T he w om an says, “ I lo v e an
e x is te n tia lis t; le t’s g e t m a rrie d , o r n o t, ju s t as y o u lik e .”
( I f th e y a re sincere, w h ic h is m ost u n lik e ly , th e ir life
to g e th e r w ill be a success.) P erhaps T h o re a u ’s lo v e
le tte r to E m erson’s w ife is an e xam ple : “ To h ea r th a t
yo u have sad h o u rs is n o t sad to m e.” T h e re is no
lo ve in Zen, o th e r th a n th e b e a tin g and cu rsin g , and
none in m ystic is m , e xce p t o f a n au seating, p e rv e rte d ,
u n n a tu ra l, im p o ssib le k in d ~ th e ‘^D ivin e E m brace” o f
Suso; ‘^rny cheek on H im ,” （ S t. Jo h n o f th e C ro s s ); “ th e
D iv in e B rid e g ro o m ” o f S t. Theresa— a ll o f w h ic h go
back to th e e ro tic is m o f th e O rp h ic m y ste rie s. In The
H ound o f H eaven, lo v e is a cosm ic b e s tia lis m .
T w o thousand years o f th e deep e xp e rie n ce o f
C h ris tia n m y s tic is m convinces us o f th e e xisten ce o f th e
God w ith w h o m c e rta in m en and w om en a tta in e d u n io n
(w h ic h m ay w e ll be re u n io n ). F ifte e n h u n d re d years
o f e q u a lly strenuous search fo r th e tr u th in C h in a and
Japan u n d e r th e aegis o f Zen has n e v e r once, even b y
accident, p ro du ced th e s lig h te s t in k lin g o f a p e rso n a l
D e ity :
A god, a god th e ir severance r u le d !
There is th u s no (p e rs o n a l) G od in Zen (B u d d h is m );
th a t is th e d e fe c t o f Zen. T h e re is a G od in (C h ris tia n )
m y s tic is m ; th a t is th e d e fe c t o f C h ris tia n ity . B u t I
b e lie ve T h o re a u , as I b e lie v e th e B ib le (w h e n I b e lie v e
it ) , in th e fo llo w in g : “ H is w o rk does n o t la c k com
pleteness, th a t th e c re a tu re consents.” “ H e has n o t m ade
us to do w ith o u t H im •” “ T ho ug h w e m u s t a b id e o u r
d e stin y, w ill H e n o t a bide i t w ith us?” W ho o r w h a t
is th is “ H e”？ .
In Zen, s in n in g is to th in k th a t w e have co m m itte d
sin. In m y sticism , sin and its im m e d ia te consequence,
o r ra th e r, coincidence, H e ll, is th e so u l’s se p a ra tio n o f
its e lf fro m G od b y s e lf-lo v e . In e x is te n tia lis m , sin is
sin; it is th e in fir m ity o f th e c re a tu re as aga in st the
p o w e r o f th e C re a to r. S in is egoism , n o t th e egoism
o f Zen, w h ic h is g iv e n up to g ain th e e n lig h te n m e n t o f
e g o fu l egolessness, b u t th e egoism o f supposing th a t
w e can be saved fro m o u r egoism . F o r e x is te n tia lis m ,
sin is p ra c tic a lly u n fo rg iv a b le sin.
Is th e re such a th in g as th e ego, w h ic h C h ris tia n ity
(m y s tic a l and e x is te n tia lis t) v io le n tly asserts, and
(p rim itiv e ) B u d d h ism e q u a lly s tro n g ly denies? The
Zen answ er is, o r sh ou ld be, th a t th e re is and th e re
is n 't— n o t p a rtly is and p a rtly is n o t, o r fro m one p o in t
o f v ie w is and fro m a n o th e r p o in t o f v ie w is not~ ~but
th a t th e so u l is -is n ， t. T h is is th e Z en experience. The
m y s tic a l expe rie nce is o f n o -s o u l, o f S oul. T he e x
is te n tia l expe rie nce is o f so u l in its se pa ra tion fro m
S oul, th o u g h a ccordin g to S a rtre ’s p h ilo s o p h y th e soul
is a nothingness. M y g ra n d m o th e r once came hom e
fro m ch u rch la u g h in g . W hen h e r c h ild re n asked h e r
w h y , she sa id ，“ T he people w e re a ll sin g in g , ‘Oh, to be
n o th in g , n o th in g !’_ and th e y w ere n o th in g , a ll th e
tim e !’’ T h is is e x is te n tia lis m . T he e n lig h te n m e n t o f
Zen is th e re a liz a tio n th a t w e a re e v e ry th in g . Ecstasy
in m y s tic is m is th e same, th e sta te o f o u r b eing a ll
th in g s . E x is te n tia lis m is th e re a liz a tio n th a t i t w ill
n eve r be necessary to sin g ，“ Oh, to be n o th in g !’’
Zen, in c o n ju n c tio n w ith Taoism , has produced the
gre ate st a rt and p o e try in C h in a and Japan. M y s tic a l
a rt, i f th e re is any, m u st be as odious as m y s tic a l p o e try
(see th e O x fo rd B o ok o f M y s tic a l V e rs e ). W o rd s w o rth ’s
re a l n a tu re p o e try , except fo r th e Im m o rta lity and
T in te rn A b b e y Odes, is n o t m y s tic a l o r even p a n th e is tic ,
b u t Zen; th e same m ay be said o f th a t o f H e rb e rt and
V aughan and T ra h e rn e . E x is te n tia lis m can h a rd ly
Humour 179
p ro du ce (v e rs e ) p o e try , w h ic h re q u ire s a h ig h degree

o f te c h n iq u e and a rtific e . I t does h o w e ve r m a n ife s t
its e lf in th e Pensees o f Pascal, F ea r and T re m b lin g ,
Thus Spake Z a ra th u s tra , th e J o u rn a ls o f T horeau, and,
b y e xce p tio n , th e p o e try o f D . H . L aw re n ce. I t sh ou ld
be noted, as fa r as a rt is concerned, th a t ju s t as th e
o rd in a ry , s o -c a lle d C h ris tia n know s n o th in g o f th e re a l
C h ris tia n ity , so K ie rk e g a a rd , in E ith e r /O r, w as o u tsid e
th e re a l a esth eticism , w h ic h is as p ro fo u n d as w e lik e
to m ake it. K ie rk e g a a rd had no m o re u n d e rs ta n d in g
o f m usic th a n B e rn a rd Shaw . H e lis te n e d to D on Ju an
e th ic a lly , as th e s to ry o f a seducer, b u t M o z a rt h im s e lf
was seduced in to com posing it. M o z a rt’s best m usic is
f u ll o f €<fe a r and tr e m b lin g ,a n d o f an in fin ite re sig n a
tio n to in fin ite s u ffe rin g . (T h e m usic o f B ach is
a n im ism .)
T he re is a g re a t d ea l o f h u m o u r in Z en; no iro n y , b u t
sarcasm is used in te a ch in g . T he h u m o u r is th a t o f p u re
nonsense, L e a r and C a rro ll’s tra n sce n d e n ta lism . An
exam ple. O ne d a y W eishan (Is a n ) ca lle d fo r th e
c h ie f m o n k to com e to h is room , b u t w he n he came,
W eishan said, uI t w as th e c h ie f m o n k I c a lle d ; w h y
on e a rth d id yo u com e?” M y s tic is m is a lm o st d e vo id
o f h u m o u r, fo r one reason because i t transcends a ll con
tra d ic tio n , th e so ul o f w it. F o r a n o th e r, a m a lic io u s ly
s m ilin g m y s tic is m , w h ic h w o u ld m ake fu n o f th e h y p o
c ritic a l seriousness o f o rth o d o x y to w a rd s th e paradoxes
o f th e In c a rn a tio n and th e T rin ity , co u ld n o t escape
e xco m m u n ica tio n . K ie rk e g a a rd has no h u m o u r, b u t a
deep iro n y , w h ic h is som etim es a lm o st to o d ire c t to be
s a tire : “ To le t o n e se lf be tra m p le d to dea th b y geese
is a slo w w a y o f d y in g !” S a rtre ’s s a tire is lik e th a t o f
S w ift. N ietzsch e is as hum orou s as a tig e r a t b ay.
H eid eg ge r is h e a v y as o n ly a G erm an can be. In th e
m a tte r o f h u m o u r Zen is fir s t and th e re s t now here.
A Zen s o cie ty is u n th in k a b le in so fa r as i t consists
o f (c e lib a te ) m onks. A sexless so cie ty is a c o n tra d ic
tio n in te rm s, and a Zen so cie ty o f la ym e n and la y -
w om en o f th e tra d itio n a l ty p e w o u ld be a re tu rn to
(re lig io u s ) fe u d a lism . A so cie ty o f m ystics is n o t in
conceivable, fo r so cie ty its e lf is a m y s tic a l idea, as
w e re a lis e w he n w e lo o k a t th e h a lf-in s a n e face o f th e
p a trio t. F o r e x is te n tia lis m th e g re a t enem y is th e w o rld
(s o c ie ty ), th e flesh (c o m fo rt, w h ic h comes c h ie fly fro m
s o c ie ty ), and th e d e v il (those “ p rin c ip a litie s and
pow ers,” w h ic h are p a rtly p e rs o n ific a tio n s o f social
fo rc e s ).
W h a t has been th e e ffe c t o f th e th re e upon society,
upon th e average m an fo r w ho m B u dd h a liv e d , and
C h ris t died? T he Zen sect has a lw a ys been, lik e A thens,
a sta te o f “ fre e ” m en am ong slaves, liv in g on them
m ore o r less, and w ith no d e sire to fre e th e m so c ia lly ,
p o litic a lly , o r fin a n c ia lly . I t has no v ie w o f society, no
ide a o f h um an progress, m a te ria l o r s p iritu a l. I t is
a lw a ys a ll th in g s to a ll m en, and w ill s u p p o rt any gov
e rn m e n t, fa s c is tic o r co m m u n istic o r dem ocratic. Its
o rg a n iz a tio n is u nch a n g e a b ly fe u d a lis tic , th o u g h on
sp ecial occasions i t has an A ll F oo ls, D a y w hen an
a bsolute e q u a lity is de rig u e u r. T he o p in io n o f Zen
adepts on w o rld a ffa irs has in v a ria b ly been a p a trio tic
o p p o rtu n is m dressed in B u d d h is t p la titu d e s . (C h ris -
tio n ) m y s tic is m has a lw a ys been u n c a th o lic . I t has
re ta rd e d (a fa ls e ) progress; th e g re a te st happiness o f
th e gre ate st n u m b e r o f people has been th e lea st o f
its concerns. E x is te n tia lis m shows th e same Shake
spearean in d iffe re n c e to and even d is lik e o f th e com
m o n a lity , th o u g h K ie rk e g a a rd w ro te a t th e v e ry end
o f h is life , “ T hou p la in m an ! I have n o t separated m y
life fro m th in e ; th o u kn o w e st it, I have liv e d in th e
stre e t, am kn o w n to a ll.”
T he danger o f Zen is th a t o f b eing sa tisfied w ith a
lim ite d , th o u g h illim ita b le e n lig h te n m e n t. D eath has
lo s t its stin g , b u t a ll o th e r m a tte rs, such as sym pathy,
s e n s itiv ity , good taste, h u m o u r, m odesty, a “ passion for(
re fo rm in g th e w o r ld ,a n d so on, are u s u a lly neglected.
T he dangers o f m y s tic is m a re s e n tim e n ta lity , s u p e rs ti
What is Zen? 181
tio n , la c k o f s e lf-c ritic is m , and u n io n w ith an in fe rio r

d em iu rge . T he dangers o f e x is te n tia lis m a re m asochism
and dem onism . W e m a y say th a t H itle r had a k in d o f
Zen, in th e w a y he w a lk e d , lik e a p a n th e r. H is id e n tifi
ca tio n o f h im s e lf w ith a p u re ly fic titio u s D eutsche R eich,
lik e h is lo v e o f W agner, w as m y s tic a l. H e p e rp e tu a lly
chose blessedness ( in r e a lity a k in d o f “ cursedness”）
instead o f happiness; th is w as h is e x is te n tia lis m . In
a d d itio n , he b e lie v e d in th e n o n -s e p a ra tio n o f th e
a nim ate and th e in a n im a te , and w o u ld perhaps have
agreed w ith T ho rea u, w ho w ro te (a passage deleted b y
L o w e ll) o f a p in e tre e , “ I t is as im m o rta l as I am , and
perchance w ill go to as h ig h a heaven, th e re to to w e r
above m e s till.”
U p to th is p o in t w e have d is tin g u is h e d Zen, m ystic is m ,
and e x is te n tia lis m . N o w le t us m ix th e m u p a b it, and
ourselves in to th e b a rg a in . Zen is n o t a re lig io n . I t
is n o t “ T he H ig h e s t D o c trin e .” T h e re is no <4W o rld o f
Zen.” A n “ A n th o lo g y o f Z en” is an a b s u rd ity (th e
B ib le o f Zen, th e M urrto n ka n p lu s th e H e k ig a n ro k u , is
th e u n iv e rs e la u g h in g a t its e lf.) Z en is n o t so m e thin g
absolute, th a t w e g ra d u a lly approach, o f w h ic h o u r
u n d e rsta n d in g increases w ith expe rie nce . I t is n o t
som ething “ once fo r a ll d e liv e re d to th e (Z e n ) sa in ts.”
I t is n o t T ru th sm uggled fro m one e s o te ric is t to a n o th e r.
Zen is a ll th a t w as, w asn’t, is, is n ’t, w ill be, and w o n ’t.
I t is th e b illb o a rd w e can see ju s t as m uch as th e tre e
i t hides. I t is e q u a lly and u n e q u a lly in th e v illa g e s lu t
and th e V irg in M a ry , in an e m p ty tin can and “ th e
so lid fra m e o f e a rth / A n d ocean’s liq u id m ass.”
H eidegger asks, ‘*W hy is th e re som ething, and n o t
n o th in g ? ” Zen is th e som e thin g, th e n o th in g . Zen is
B ram ah, and in c lu d e s th e sw am is and th e sw oonies and
m oonies and baboonies toonies. The Scale o f P e rfe c
tio n , a 14th c e n tu ry re lig io u s tre a tis e , says th a t w hen
w e go hom e to a sm oky house and a sco ld in g w ife —
do n o t ru n o u t o f it, uio v b e h in d th is n othingness, be
h in d th is fo rm le s s shape o f e v il, is Jesus h id in h is
182 Zen, Mysticism^ Existentialism
jo y .” B u t even th is m u st be am ended; th e sm oky house,

th e sco ld in g w ife is Jesus in h is jo y . In th is m ysticism
w e have th e Zen e xperience th a t illu s io n , th a t is, re a lity ,
th e sm oky house, is e n lig h te n m e n t, th a t is, re a lity , Jesus
— b u t n o t in th e same w a y, as H a k u in Z e n ji says, th a t
ice is w a te r. J u s t as ice is ice, n o t w a te r, so illu s io n
is e n lig h te n m e n t. A n d illu s io n and e n lig h te n m e n t are
d iffe re n t, ju s t as w a te r and ice a re th e same. W e m ay
say th a t th e re is “ so m e th in g ” w h ic h is n e ith e r ice n o r
w a te r; w h ic h is b o th ice and w a te r, w h ic h is e ith e r ice
o r w a te r, b u t n o t b o th . T h is “ so m e thin g ” w o u ld be
lik e T h o re a u ’s God, m e n tio n e d befo re , lik e E c k h a rt’s,
w h ic h also is nam eless, n o t in th e d ic tio n a ry , b u t i t is
also K ie rk e g a a rd ’s God, n o t ectoplasm , n o t less personal
b u t m ore so th a n even K ie rk e g a a rd h im s e lf. Zen is
w h a t w e can’t say i t is, n o t because i t is beyond w ords
o r sounds, fa r fro m it, b u t because i t is beyond its e lf.
W hen I l i f t m y hand, th e re is Zen, and w hen I don， t,
and w he n th e re is no hand to lif t , and w hen th e re ’s
no l i f t to hand. A s T ho rea u says, “ Sound tests o u r
soundness,” b u t any sound w ill do. “ T he squeaking o f
th e pum p sounds as necessary as th e m usic o f the
spheres.” A n d N ietzsche says, “ I t is a c ru c ia l fa c t th a t
th e s p ir it p re fe rs to descend upon th e s ic k and s u ffe r
in g .” God is in fin ite ly nea r us, as B ro w n in g kn ew , and
in fin ite ly fa r fro m us, as C ow p er also kn e w . ( I f o n ly
H e w o u ld be one o r th e o th e r !) A m an is “ s u p e rio r”
to a stone. Yes, b u t w h y d id W o rd s w o rth lis te n so
êvoutly to “the music of that old stone wall”？ Was
i t due to h is b eing to ne -d e af? O r is a w a ll som ehow
“ s u p e rio r” to T hisb e and P yram us, w ho g ra te fu lly use
even a cra ck in it? On th e one hand w e kn o w th a t
people are s h a llo w and unteachable, and th a t th e re is
m ore d iffe re n c e betw een M o za rt and m e th a n betw een
a p ia n and a m o n ke y; on th e o th e r, as W uyeh (M u g6 )
said，“ I f yo u s till re ta in a h a ir’s th ickne ss o f an idea o f
th e re being such th in g s as o rd in a ry m en and sages, you
cannot a vo id being re b o rn as a d on ke y o r a horse.”
My Religion 183
T he o rth o d o x v ie w o f Zen is th a t w ith o u t m an Zen
is im p o ssib le . So in B u d d h ism , i f th e re are no hum an
beings th e re is no B uddha. T h is is w ro n g . T he m is
ta ke arises fro m a n th ro p o c e n tric ity , w h ic h again causes
and is caused b y th e la c k o f m y s tic a l and a n im is tic
experiences. A R om an C a th o lic , R o b e rt S o u th w e ll,
kn e w b e tte r:
W h o le m a y H is b od y be in sm a lle st bread,
W h o le in th e w h o le , yea, w h o le in e v e ry crum b.
The fir s t lin e o f th e poem o f th e 46th Case o f th e

H e k ig a n ro k u is :
虚堂雨滴声
T he sound o f th e ra in -d ro p s in th e e m p ty h a ll.
Sengai has a p ic tu re o f a b lin d m an p la y in g a sam isen

u n d e r th e m oon, a n o th e r m an lo o k in g up a t it, and
tw o o thers ju s t e n jo y in g them selves; th e ve rse on it :
見石見◎ 呔人〖c e :乇态;k 秋◦ 月

To see, o r n o t to see,
T h a t is m an ’s q u e stio n —
B u t th e a u tu m n m o o n !
M an is n o t th e o n ly m easure o f a ll th in g s . Each th in g
m easures its e lf, is in trin s ic ; and m easures and is
m easured b y a ll o th e r th in g s , is e x trin s ic . E x is te n tia l
ism m akes th e same m is ta k e h e re as (o rth o d o x ) Z en;
i t is too m a n -c e n tre d . W e see n ow h o w m uch Zen and
m y sticism and e x is te n tia lis m need each o th e r.
T he o th e r d a y som eone asked m e, fo r th e second tim e
in m y life , w h a t m y re lig io n was. (T h e fir s t tim e I
answ ered tr u ly , b u t in ju d ic io u s ly , th a t I w as a vege
ta ria n .) T h is tim e I sa id : 1. I b e lie v e in th in g s , o r
ra th e r, I b e lie v e th in g s . 2. These th in g s are a ll e q u a lly
(b u t also m o re o r less, a cco rd in g to in te rn a l and e x
te rn a l circu m sta n ce s) v iv id , liv e ly , life -h a v in g , life
g iv in g , “ a liv e .” 3. T he u rg e o f (m y o w n ) life is to
get closer and closer to th in g s. 4. T he closer w e get
th e fa rth e r w e fe e l, and th e g re a te r th e anguish o f
se pa ra tion . T he fir s t is Zen; th e second, a n im ism ; the
th ird , m y s tic is m ; th e fo u rth , e x is te n tia lis m . To con
clud e w ith a com parison betw een th e tw o extrem es,
th e la s t and th e firs t: K ie rk e g a a rd w ro te : “ No d ou bt
can come sneaking in betw een th e w a y and th e a fflic tio n ,
fo r th e y are e te rn a lly in se p a ra b le .” A m on k said to
Y iie n sh a n (Y a k u s a n ), “ I have a d ou bt, and I w o u ld lik e
yo u to re so lve it . ” Y iie n sh a n said, “ W a it t i l l th is
e vening, and I w ill re so lve i t fo r y o u .” In th e evening
th e m onks a ll assem bled, and Y uehshan said to them ,
“ Today, one o f yo u asked m e to reso lve h is d o u b t,” and
th e m o n k came fo rw a rd . Y uehshan le ft h is seat, to o k
h o ld o f h im , and crie d , “ L o o k, e ve ryb o d y, th is m onk
has a d o u b t!” pushed h im aw ay, and w e n t back to
h is room .
Chapter X X III
W A Y S , AND THE W A Y
Is th e re such a th in g as T he W ay? Is i t n o t ra th e r,
as th e Japanese seem to b e lie v e b y in s tin c t, th a t a re
ju s t as m an y w ays as th e re are (typ e s o f) persons? Is
th e re such a th in g as good ta ste and bad taste, o r o n ly
m y (good) ta ste and y o u r (b a d ) ta ste and his? A ll
re lig io n is fo r T he W a y; a ll e xp e rie n ce and com m on
sense is a gainst it. B u t m a rria g e , th e o rd in a ry m a r
ria g e presum es th a t a t le a st these tw o people h a ve one
w ay betw een th em , and th e m a rria g e o f tw o m in d s in
general, w h e th e r in sound o r w o rd s o r fo rm o r co lo u r,
presupposes th a t th e w rite r has h is readers, th e m u sicia n
h is audience, th e p h ilo s o p h e r h is d iscip le s,— b u t h a ve
th e y, re a lly ? W ho can jo in w h a t G od h a th p u t
asunder?
A g a in , N a tu re p o ssib ly, and even p ro b a b ly , has A
Purpose, b u t s t ill m o re p ro b a b ly w ill change th is
Purpose fo r a n o th e r i f circu m stan ces dem and it . J u s t
as w e hum an beings a re s u b je c t to a ll k in d s o f a ccid en t,
so is N a tu re h e rs e lf, and does w h a t can be done, n o t
w h a t can’t. A m an w h o has a w a y is o n ly a k in d o f
a n im a l a fte r a ll. A m an w h o th in k s h is is T he W ay
deceives h im s e lf no d o u b t. B u t as N ietzsch e said, some
k in d s o f e rro rs and delusio ns a re as necessary fo r life ,
th a t is, fo r th e W ay, as tr u th is, perhaps m ore so.
N a tu re deceives us; w e deceive o urselve s; b u t N a tu re
also deceives h e rs e lf, and th is is th e ju s tific a tio n o f
e x is te n tia lis m , w h ic h m eans th a t e v e ry m an m u st
deceive h im s e lf and no o th e r person. “ L e t N a tu re be
y o u r te a ch e r” in th is also.
A m an is n o t ju s t a n o th e r a n im a l in th e u n iv e rs a l
186 Ways, and the Way
Zoo. H e is, and m ust b e lie v e th a t he is, n o t o n ly a

m ovem ent to w a rd s so m ething, b u t to a c e rta in e x te n t
a lre a d y th a t S om ething. T he “ O ne fa r-o ff, d iv in e event
to w h ic h th e w h o le c re a tio n m oves” is o c c u rrin g here
and now . B u t th e p re sen t p ro b le m is n o t w h e th e r
h u m a n ity has its W ay o r n o t, b u t w h e th e r m in e is th a t
W ay o r o n ly m y w a y. A W ay im p lie s tw o necessary
c o n d itio n s ; firs t, people w a lk in g on it, m ore o r less
consciou sly; second, an u ltim a te goal, m ore o r less u n
k n o w n and u n kn o w n a b le , b u t b e lie ve d to e x is t. The
n u m b e r o f people a c tu a lly w a lk in g th e w a y is n o t o f
course so im p o rta n t as th e ir q u a lity , b u t i t is necessary
th a t th is m in o rity sh ou ld be so to speak th e spear end,
n o t th e b u tt end. M a jo ritie s w ill a lw a ys persecute
m in o ritie s , b u t th e m a jo rity , th o u g h n e ve r rig h t, is n o t
a lw a ys w ro n g , (u s u a lly th e y a re ju s t n o th in g a t a ll) ,
and th e re fo re th e m in o rity , th o u g h n e ve r w ro n g , is n o t
a lw a ys rig h t.
W e ta lk o f “ r ig h t” and “ w ro n g ,” b u t w h a t is th e
sta n d a rd b y w h ic h to decide? The answ er is cle a r:
th e re is none, and even th is answ er cannot be m ade
d o g m a tic a lly . W e m ay h o w e ve r v e n tu re a lit t le fu rth e r
on th is u n c e rta in g ro un d, and assert, as a c o ro lla ry o f
th e fir s t sentence in Laotse, th a t to th e e x te n t th a t a
w a y declares its e lf to be The W ay, i t is n o t. T h e re is a
lin e o f John C la re th a t a pp lie s h e re :
S ile n t is th e life o f flo w e rs.
T he W ay o f flo w e rs is a s ile n t one, n o t th a t flo w e rs

don’t speak because th e y can’t, b u t because th e y don’t
happen to w a n t to. O f course th e y w o u ld , lik e th e
stones o f Jerusalem w hen C h ris t e ntered th e c ity , c ry
o u t i f th e y d id happen to w a n t to. T h e ir expressive
silen ce is w ille d , n o t in v o lu n ta ry . T he life , th e W ay
o f m en is also s ile n t, b u t th e silence is a d iffe re n t one,
and m ay be in w ords. T ho rea u says, “ I t takes a m an
to m ake a room s ile n t•” T h is S ilen ce n e ve r stops, w h a t
My Way 187
e ver noise w e m ay m ake. C h ris tia n ity , B u dd h ism ,
H um anism , Zen, E x is te n tia lis m , N a tu ra lis m ,— these are
a ll noises, a re a ll b ub bles on th e su rfa ce o f th e e v e r-
flo w in g riv e r. A s a c h ild I used to sin g :
N o w th e d a y is o v e r;
N ig h t is d ra w in g n ig h ;
Shadow s o f th e e ven in g
S te a l across th e sky.
T h is is th e r iv e r; th e silence, th e w a y, w ith no unneces

sa ry c a p ita l le tte r.
T h is is th e W ay, b u t h ow s h a ll w e w a lk on it, and
s h a ll i t be alone, o r hand in hand, and i f so, w ith w hom ?
W hat s h a ll w e do, w h a t s h a ll w e n o t do, and h o w s h a ll
w e do it, and n o t do it ; in th is w ayless w o rld , w h e re
people have resign e d them selves to s p in n in g ro u n d lik e
teetotum s o f some b ra n d o r another? L e t m e p u t m y
cards on th e ta b le , fo r I th in k I have a good hand, n o t
th e w h o le pack, c e rta in ly , b u t . . . .
I am a p a c ifis t, le ttin g o th e r people d efe nd m e fro m
a ll those m illio n s w h o w o u ld ro b m e o f m y w o rld ly
goods, lib e rty , and life its e lf; a v e g e ta ria n w hose shoes
are m ade o f le a th e r; a te a ch e r w h o teaches th a t o n ly
teachers a re hum an, business m en, p o litic ia n s , d octors,
la w ye rs and so on b e in g m e re p a ra s itic b la c k m a ile rs ,
and w ho teaches also th a t p eo ple a re u nte ach a ble. T he
m ost im p o rta n t th in g o f a ll, th e m ost hum an th in g is,
as D .H . L a w re n ce said, to h ave r ig h t re la tio n s w ith a
p a rtic u la r w om an. B y “ r ig h t re la tio n s ” I m ean, as
L a w re n ce d id n o t, th a t she sh ou ld w a lk th e W ay (w h ic h ,
as is q u ite e v id e n t b y nov/, m eans m y w a y ) in th e
same w a y as I do, a lb e it w ith a w om an’s legs. She
m ust th e n be a p a c ifis t, a v e g e ta ria n , a (stu d e n tle ss)
teacher, o r w h a t is m uch th e same th in g , a (te a c h e r
less) s tu d e n t. In a d d itio n she m u st have no in te re s t
in m oney, h e r o w n , 01，o th e r people’s; no a m b itio n , no
d e sire “ to im p ro v e h e r so u l’s estate.” A nybody b u t
B ach a lw a y s and M o z a rt som etim es is to be lis te n e d to
188 Ways, and the Way
w ith o n ly h a lf an ear. E v e ry a rtic le o f d a ily life is

to be chosen w ith th e g re a te st care (n o t th e greatest
m o n e y ); cups and k e ttle s m u st be th e best th a t a little
m oney w ill b u y . T ra in s , buses, b u ild in g s , stree ts and
th e people in th em are a ll seen w ith th e s o rt o f h o rro r,
th a t D an te fe lt as he gazed a ro u n d in th e In fe rn o . The
ugliness, th e s tu p id ity , th e m eaninglessness ! She neve r
reads th e new spapers, th e a d ve rtise m e nts, B u d d h is t
m agazines; has no re cre a tio n s o r am usem ents; alw ays
busy, she does n o th in g “ to pass th e tim e ,” 一 i t a ll sounds
so te r r ib ly snobbish and h ig h b ro w ! B u t w h a t do
C h ris tia n s th in k th e y are going to do in H eaven? W h a t
books are th e y g oing to read? D o th e y th in k th e y are
going to p la y Johann S trauss on th e ir golden harps?
D ante was n o t so cheap as to suppose th a t people ta lk e d
shop even in L im b o . P eople seem to w a n t to liv e
g re e d ily and v u lg a rly now , because th e y th in k th e y
w o n ’t be able to do so in th e n e x t w o rld .
I t w ill be seen th a t th is “ W a y” does n o t im p ly th a t
each person is to liv e h is ow n life , d e ve lo p in g h is ow n
ta le n ts , to liv e as h is n a tu re urges h im , in a w o rd , to
be fre e . H e has to liv e as m y n a tu re te lls m e to liv e ,
and urges m e to u rg e h im to liv e . Indeed, th e firs t
step is to change h is ow n ch a ra cte r, to lo v e snakes and
h ate ja z z ; to despise leaders o f in d u s try and a d m ire
th e in d u s trio u s a n t; to a bh or B u d d h is t societies and
In te rn a tio n a l C u ltu re ; to d is lik e so cia lism as m uch as
c a p ita lis m ; to lo v e people w ho re a lly lo v e som ething
o r som ebody; to be u n w illin g above a ll th in g s to ta lk
about The W ay and such nonsense.
F u rth e r, th is W ay does n o t g uarantee any k in d o f
s p iritu a l success, peace o f m in d , e fficie n cy, good h e a lth ,
se lf-co nfid en ce, co n c e n tra tio n o f one， s pow ers, sa to ri,
“ e ve ry day spent u s e fu lly and h a p p ily ,” so th a t w e
leave th e w o rld a b e tte r place th a n w e fo u n d it.
W o rd s w o rth and h is s is te r D o ro th y , T horeau, Basho,
N ietzsche, K ie rk e g a a rd , S w ift, C ow per,— th e liv e s o f
such people are n o t h e ld up as m odels fo r earnest young
Determinism 189
people, b u t th e y w ere a t le a st s tra y in g along th e W ay.

To go b ack to th e o rig in a l que stion ,一 a re th e re d if
fe re n t w ays fo r d iffe re n t people, o r is th e re O ne W ay
fo r everybo dy? T he answ er is th a t each in d iv id u a l,
p u re ly s u b je c tiv e ly and w ith a bsolute fre e d o m o f choice
could, (b u t does n o t) a rriv e a t th is One W ay b y ac
cid e n t. In th is w o rld , each in d iv id u a l life is d e te rm in e d
C a lv in is tic a lly ; h is c h a ra cte r a t b irth decides to w h a t
e x te n t he s h a ll w a lk th is W ay. God, th a t is, N a tu re ,
decides w ho s h a ll go to H eaven, i.e. w a lk th e W ay,
o r n o t. A m an’s e ffo rts are o f lit t le avaH. H o w e ve r
m uch w e s u p p o rt th e A n im a l W e lfa re S ociety, i t m akes
no d iffe re n c e to o u r re a l lo v e o f anim a ls (H e ave n ) o r
re a l in d iffe re n c e to th em ( H e ll) . T eaching and w r it
in g and s ittin g u n d e r B o -tre e s and d y in g on crosses
have n o th in g to do w ith o th e r people’s s a lv a tio n . Y e t
th ou gh w e k n o w th is , and w hen w e k n o w th is , and
because w e k n o w th is , w e co n tin u e to teach and w rite
and s it and d ie fo r others. W hy? T h is is th e W ay.
Chapter X X IV
NATURE, HUMAN NATURE,

THE BUDDHA NATURE, THE POETIC NATURE
N a tu re m eans th e w h o le u n ive rse , m a te ria l and

s p iritu a l. O r i t m ay m ean th e u n iv e rs e except m an
and w h a t he has created. B u t w he n i t is said th a t “ the
Japanese lo v e N a tu re ,M N a tu re m eans flo w e rs, s m a ll
b ird s , riv e rs and m o u n ta in s (n o t vo lca n o e s), tam e o r
u se fu l anim als, and so on, a v e ry s m a ll p a rt o f N a tu re ,
and a t present, n o t a m illio n years ago o r in th e fu tu re ,
and e x c lu d in g scorpions, b a c te ria , e arthquakes and so
on. T he m ost pressing q ue stion is, does N a tu re lo v e ns,
as re lig io n believes, o r does i t h a te us, as Shakespeare
th o u g h t in K in g L e a r and M acbeth, o r is i t in d iffe re n t to
us, as m ost people to d a y feel? (T o suppose th a t N a tu re
som etim es loves us, som etim es hates us, is som etim es
in d iffe re n t to us, seems to m e, as i t d id to E u rip id e s,
im p o ssib le .) W e m ay ask a q ue stion w h ic h is a no the r
fo rm o f th e same q u e stio n : do yo u lo v e N a tu re , hate
N a tu re , o r are yo u in d iffe re n t to N ature? These tw o
p a irs o f a lte rn a tiv e s correspond e x a c tly , fo r lo ve , h a tre d ,
and in d iffe re n c e a re a lw a ys m u tu a l, as D a n te declares:
to lo v e is to be love d, to h ate is to be h ated, to be
in d iffe re n t is to re ce ive in d iffe re n c e . B u t a c tu a lly , o u r
re la tio n to N a tu re , o u r re a l re la tio n , is n o t one o f these
th re e , n o r a co m b in a tio n o f th e m ; i t is n u m b e r fo u r.
H um an n a tu re in v o lv e s fiv e elem ents, firs t, th e so-
ca lle d firs t la w o f N a tu re , s e lf-p re s e rv a tio n . A s D . H .
L a w re n ce said, “ A r t fo r m y sake.” Second, th e re is
th e e q u a lly o r perhaps m ore fu n d a m e n ta l ( if T o lsto y
was n o t m is ta k e n ) in s tin c t o f th e p re s e rv a tio n o f others.
T he re is m a rria g e and p ro c re a tio n ; th e re is s e lf-s a c rific e .
The Buddha Nature 191
T h ird , m an desires th e im p ossib le, th e in fin ite , th e

e te rn a l; he w ishes to be om n iscie nt, o m n ip o te n t. The
fo u rth is an odd one: m an desires to su ffe r, to s u ffe r
fo r its o w n sake; th is is com m only ca lle d m asochism ,
b u t th e p le a su re in p a in is to some e x te n t a d esire fo r
a d e p th o f e xpe rie nce w h ic h m ere p leasure h a rd ly gives.
L a st, and stro n g e st o f a ll, th e re is th e d esire fo r death,
fo r noth ing ne ss; w e fin d th is too w e ll expressed b y
C h ris tin a R osse tti. These fiv e th in g s to g e th e r m ake up
o u r hum an n a tu re .
The B uddha n a tu re is n o t o n ly ours, b u t th a t o f a ll
creatures, and even o f in s e n tie n t, a p p a re n tly soul-less
th in g s. E v e ry th in g in th e u n ive rse s h a ll u ltim a te ly
become B uddha, th a t is, e v e ry a n im a te and in a n im a te
being is o f such a n a tu re th a t i t w ill becom e th e A ll.
T h is sounds v e ry fin e , and I m y s e lf fe e l s tro n g ly in
clin e d to b e lie v e it. To go to H eaven to g e th e r w ith
drow ned ra ts and sticks and stones and p im ps and
d ru n ka rd s, even successful business m en and p o litic ia n s ,
— th is su its m e dow n to th e g ro u n d . B u t has th e dog
th e B uddha natu re ? In s p ite o f w h a t Joshu said,
th e answ er is Yes. M u s t I th e n d ie lik e a dog? The
answ er again is Yes. I am n o t g oing to H eaven a t a ll
then, n o r th e dog n o r th e d ro w n e d ra ts and so on? N o,
yo u are n o t. I f th is is w h a t h a v in g th e B u dd h a n a tu re
means, one w o u ld be ju s t as w e ll o ff w ith o u t it. A fte r
a ll, w e m ust ask Zen to h e lp us o u t o f o u r d espair, and
o ut o f o u r hope as w e ll. T he tr u th is th a t w e have n o t
any specific th in g th a t can be c a lle d th e B uddha n a tu re ,
o r s h a ll w e n o t ra th e r say th a t w e b o th have i t and
do n o t have it, a t th e same tim e . I t is tru e th a t w e
have no im m o rta lity , b u t w e have som ething fa r b e tte r,
w e have tim e , and w e h ave tim elessness. O r le t us
say th a t w e h ave so m e thin g betw een th e tw o ; w e have
tim e :
A h , S u n flo w e r, w e a ry o f tim e ,
T h a t co un test th e steps o f th e sun.
192 The Buddha, the Poetic Nature
W e w a n t to escape fro m tim e :
S eeking a fte r th a t sw eet g olden c lim e

W here th e tra v e lle r^ jo u rn e y is done.
B u t i t is th e seeking, th e a s p irin g , th e m ove m e nt w h ich

is th e th in g . O u r B uddha n a tu re is o u r becom ing
Buddha. This “becoming” has tw o aspects: we are
a lre a d y th e re ; o u r jo u rn e y is a lre a d y done; w e have
fo u g h t th e good fig h t. B u t w e s h a ll n e ve r a rriv e th e re ;
w e s h a ll lose e ve ry b a ttle w ith th e s tu p id ity and d u ll
ness o f ourselves and others. W e m u st teach th e u n -
teachable，d o th e im p o s s ib le ，m a k e tin ie e te rn a L
W h a t is th e p o e tic n ature? T hin gs m ean; th e y m ean
d e e p ly; th e y m ean in fin ite ly . T h is is th e ir p o e tic n a tu re .
H ow ever, th o u g h th e y s im p ly m ean, and do n o t m ean
som ething, th e y m ean to us, and w e are m eant b y them .
T he p o e try o f a th in g and a person arises fro m th e ir
c o n ju n c tio n . A flo w e r b y its e lf is e v e ry th in g , no d oubt,
b u t on th e o th e r hand i t is n o th in g . A hum an being is
th e same, b u t w hen these tw o e v e ry th in g s o r n o th in g s
come to g e th e r, w e get so m e thin g; th e p o e tic n a tu re is
a ctiva te d . A poet is th e tru e m an. A n u n p o e tic a l m an
is a m onkey. B u t th e p o e tic a l n a tu re belongs to N a tu re
as w e ll as to hum an n a tu re . Purpose, w h ic h is u n
conscious purpose, is a lw ays kn o w n b y th e re s u lt. I t
was N a tu re th a t produced th e poet» and th is w as “ th a t
one fa r-o ff d iv in e even t to w h ic h th e w h o le cre a tio n
m oves.”
N a tu re , hum an n a tu re , th e B u ddha n a tu re , th e p oetic
n a tu re ,— these are a ll one th in g , (th o u g h th e y are also
d iffe re n t th in g s ). H u m a n ity is im p lic it in th e vastest,
em p tiest space. W e speak r ig h tly o f a sto n y silence, o r
a w ooden expression. T he B uddha n a tu re is s im p ly
o u r ow n deepest n a tu re . M om ents o f v is io n , o u r poe tic
hours, are those o f B uddhahood; th e re is no o th e r.
W h e re ver w e lo o k, w e see N a tu re , w e see o u r hum an
n a tu re , w e see the B uddha n a tu re , w e see th e poe tic
Human Nature 193
n a tu re . A ll th a t w e touch and sm e ll and ta ste and

hea r also is so. T h is is th e re a l C h ris tia n life , th o u g h
w e do n o t b e lie v e in C h ris tia n ity . I t is th e re a l B u d
d h is t life , th o u g h B u dd h ism is fa r fro m us. I t is th e
life o f Zen, th ou gh w e have n o t th e s lig h te s t idea w h a t
Zen is.
Chapter X X V
DEFECTS OF ZEN
The o ld p ro v e rb , “ I t is a fo u le b y rd th a t fy le th h is
ow ne nest,” expresses th e hum an d is lik e o f tru th , fo r
o u r nest is th e u niverse . Thus, to a tta c k re lig io n —
n o t a re lig io n , fo r th a t o n ly in v o lv e s p e rse cu tio n and
perhaps death_ is to be a cosm ic Judas, and b e tra y
h u m a n ity ,— to w hat?
O f course, a system o f th o u g h t and fa ith m ig h t be
p e rfe c t a lth o u g h its adherents are n o t, and in th a t case,
i t w ill be urged, w e should a tta c k th e b e lie v e r, n o t h is
(o ste n sib le ) b e lie f. H ow e ver, Zen is n o t a system , a
th e o ry , an id e a l, and can c la im no im m u n ity on th a t
gro un d.
Em pson, in h is book on M ilto n , says th a t he has a l
w ays th o u g h t o f (M ilto n ^ ) God as a v e ry w ic k e d person.
H e means th a t he th in k s M ilto n w as a v e ry w icke d
person, and I agree, b u t th e re is no o th e r God th a n
M ilto n ’s God and Em pson’s God and B ly th ’s God. D id
a ny o th e r God e xist, w e co uld have no kn o w le d g e o f
H im ; even re v e la tio n cannot re ve a l, as fa r as re lig io u s
m a tte rs are concerned, m ore th a n a person can grasp
w ith h is ow n a b ilitie s . T hus th e u n iv e rs e is e q u iv a le n t,
e th ic a lly and re lig io u s ly , to th e best m an in it. A W ay
o f L ife is as good as, and no b e tte r th a n th e people w ho
w a lk it. T he re is no P la to n ic , a b stra ct, id e a l Zen; even
i f th e re w ere, as said befo re , i t w o u ld have no m eaning
fo r us, fo r w e liv e b y o u r ow n Zen, n o t Zen's Zen.
B u dd h ism lo n g ago saw a ll th is , and th e d iffic u lty was
covered, in tw o senses o f th e w o rd , b y th e d o c trin e o f
te m p o ra ry te ach ing fo r those w ho co uld n o t e n te r the
h ig h e r realm s o f B u d d h is t transcendence.
Perfection and Imperfection 195
A n o th e r o b je c tio n to th e ra d ic a l c ritic is m o f Zen is

th a t since Zen ca nn ot be defined, has no dogm as, is
beyond te a ch in g , and is e s s e n tia lly n on -d icho tom o us,
i t ca nn ot have even a n y good p o in ts, le t alone bad
ones. To p u t th e m a tte r in a n o th e r w a y, Zen is th e
best o f e v e ry th in g , th e p e rfe c te d la te n t in th e im p e rfe c t,
th e a bso lu te its e lf, so w e can n e ith e r p ra ise n o r blam e
it, o n ly liv e in i t w ith h u m b le g ra titu d e . C h ris t also says,
aB e ye p e rfe c t, even as y o u r F a th e r in H eaven is p e r
fe c t/* and i t m a y be a d m itte d th a t som etim es some o f
o u r actions a re p e rfe c t, a re Z e n -lik e , in th e sense
th a t th e y are th e best possible u n d e r th e g ive n co n d i
tio n s fo r th a t p a rtic u la r person w ith h is u n a vo id a b le
lim ita tio n s . B u t a “ p e rfe c t” act b y an im p e rfe c t b eing
is s till fa r fro m p e rfe c t in th e re a l sense o f th e w o rd ,
and a p e rfe c t b e in g w o u ld n o t act a t a ll. T he e a rly
C h ris tia n m ystics used th e w o rd “ d e ific a tio n ,” n o t
a lto g e th e r h e re tic a lly , to express th e u n io m ystica, b u t
is th e God w ith w ho m th e y w e re “ oned” as in to le ra n t,
uneducated, unhum orous, to n e -d e a f, u n p o e tic a l, in
a rtis tic , c ru e l, and s tu p id as th e y o fte n w ere? So w ith
Zen. M y Zen k ills cats w ith h o rro r, b u t n o t so N ansen’s.
End laughs zazen to scorn, b u t w h a t do o th e rs say? D r.
S u zu ki sees Z en in a b u ll-fig h te r; I see i t in th e b u ll.
<4I f yo u have n o t had kensho, w h a t y o u say a b o u t Zen
is n o t w o rth lis te n in g to .” B u t h ow lit t le sense and
s e n s ib ility , h o w m uch p rid e and p re ju d ic e is show n b y
m any w ho h ave had i t ! Zen is o n ly a n o th e r absolute,
b u t th is tim e d e v o id o f a ttrib u te s , fre e d o m u n lim ite d ,
in n a tu re lik e E c k h a rt’s nam eless G odhead, so th a t w e
w ou nd ourselve s in a tta c k in g it,
F o r i t is , as th e a ir, in v u ln e ra b le ,
A n d o u r v a in b lo w s m a lic io u s m o cke ry.
Zen is e xce ssive ly m o n is tic , a fa u lt o f p h ilo s o p h y and

science, o r ra th e r, a fa u lt w h ic h is p h ilo s o p h y and
science. T he a n c ie n t In d ia n s d iscovered o r in v e n te d th e
O v e r-S o u l. T he C hinese, th o u g h n o t p h ilo s o p h ic a l in
196 Defects of Zen
th e E uropean sense o f th e w o rd , so ug ht a fte r T he W ay,

a synthesis and an o rig in o f a ll th e (a c tu a lly ir r e
co n cila b le , in te lle c tu a lly ) d is p a ra te and c o n tra d ic to ry
p h y s ic o -s p iritu a l fa cts o f life as hum an beings in p a rt
m ake it. Zen is one o f these W ays, indeed W ay
w h ic h ca nn ot be ca lle d a w a y， ” and th e re fo re an E te rn a l
W ay. T he b od y appears to be a u n ity , and w a lk s upon
o n ly one w a y a t a tim e , and proceeds fro m one specific
place to a n o th e r specific place, b u t m an is n o t such a
sim p le cre a tu re . H is hom e is th is w o rld , th is place,
th is m om ent, b u t i t is also in fin ity and tim elessness. H e
m ay w a lk backw ard s as he w a lk s fo rw a rd s , o r m ove
along m o tio n le s s ly . T he goa l o f life is also a lre a d y
reached. “ I h ave fo u g h t th e good fig h t; h e n ce fo rth
(th a t is, in th e e te rn a l p re se n t) is la id up fo r m e a
cro w n o f g lo ry .” T hus th e w o rd “ w a y， ” e sp e cia lly w ith
a c a p ita l le tte r, is lik e a ll m etaphors, n o t m e re ly m is
le a d in g , b u t th e v e ry e rro r o f th e m oon.
T he Japanese, w ho a re even less p h ilo s o p h ic a l th a n
th e C hinese, and m ore p o e tic a l, h ave a lw a ys stressed
th e p a rtic u la r, th e concrete. “ H ave a cup o f tea !” The
tea is o f course th e universe^ b u t w e m u st p re te n d i t
is n o t. T he sound o f th e w a te r w he n th e fro g ju m p s
in to th e o ld pond is th e m usic o f th e spheres, b u t w e
m ustn ’t say so. T he Japanese a re b y n a tu re p lu ra lis tic
and p o ly th e is tic , in sp ite o f th e Im p e ria l W ay, and
B ushido. W hen th e y ta lk g e n e ra litie s , th e y ta lk , as th e y
should, nonsense. Zen has th e o pp osite te n d e n cy o f
m a k in g tw o in to one, o f in s is tin g th a t ice and w a te r
are re a lly th e same, as in H a k u in Z e n jis Wasan. In
Zen th e so ul m ust “ becom e th e th in g i t co nte m p lates•”
W hen w e a re asked, “ A liv e , o r dead?，，
, w e m u st answ er
“ Yes !” B u t suppose w e are asked w h ic h is b e tte r, th e
m usic o f Bach o r o f Sousa? W h ich is b e tte r, th e verse
o f C la re o r E lla W h e eler W ilco x? W e cannot answ er
Yes to these. W e m u st come dow n on one side o f th e
fence o r th e o th e r. A re w e to g iv e a Zen answ er o r a
ra tio n a l one? Z en is n o t u n a w a re o f th is d iffic u lty , and
Tea 197
declares th a t “ i t is a Zen o f th e liv in g , fo r u n to Zen a ll
liv e ,” th a t e n lig h te n m e n t is illu s io n , th a t sameness is
d iffe re n ce . H o w e ve r, these are also statem ents, o f
m onism , and in b e in g so a re as dichotom ous as th e best
o f th em . Zen sh ou ld n o t assert th a t th is is th a t, th a t
a ll is one, o r one is a ll. I t sh ou ld n e ve r g e n e ra lise o r
p a rtic u la ris e . I t sh ou ld n e ith e r speak n o r be s ile n t. In
Zen w e d rin k tea as i f n o t d rin k in g , as i f d rin k in g th e
u n iverse , b u t o n ly “ as if . ” T he re s u rre c tio n o f C h ris t
is a s w in d le ; dead is dead. K eats was a lia r ; he co u ld n o t
becom e a sp a rro w o u tsid e th e w in d o w and peck in th e
g ra ve l. I t is n o t re a lly possible to d rin k tea and n o t
d rin k tea a t th e sam e tim e , fo r in p h y s ic a l fa c t th e tea
is e ith e r d ru n k o r n o t. Y o u can’t have y o u r cake and
eat i t too in th e p h y s ic a l w o rld , and th e p h y s ic a l and
s p iritu a l w o rld s a re one, a cco rd in g to Zen. I t m ay be
said, “ I t is p ossible to d rin k tea and n o t d rin k tea a t
the same tim e in th e s p iritu a l w o rld , and th e s p iritu a l
and p h y s ic a l w o rld s a re one, a cco rd in g to Z en,” 一 fro m
w h ich w e can n ow see th a t th e s p iritu a l and th e
p h ysica l w o rld s are n o t one, as th e m o n ists assert.
T here is o n ly one p ro b le m : Is th e w o rld G ood o r
Bad? Is life lik e Grace A b o u n d in g and P ilg rim 's P ro
gress, o r lik e The T r ia l and The Castle? Does th e
u n ive rse “ lo v e ” us, and do w e, as in d iv id u a ls , ris e fro m
bad to good, and fro m good to b e tte r? O r a re w e a ll
sinners a ga in st th e H o ly G host, g u ilty o f w h a t sin w e
kn o w n o t; is th e U n a tta in a b le also th e M alefic? By
m e re ly c o n tin u in g to liv e , m ost m en ta c itly a d m it th a t
th e y th in k th is life b e tte r th a n n o th in g a t a ll. Zen
presum es, and p ro ves to its devotees, th a t its w o rld is
Good, and enables th e m to liv e a fa ir ly u n tro u b le d ,
th o u g h n o t n e ce ssa rily good, life . T he w o rd G ood im
p lie s th a t bad is s w a llo w e d up in it. B y Bad w e m ean
th a t th e u n iv e rs e is m eaningless. T h is is h o w e ve r n o t
lo g ic a lly co n ce iva b le , since i f th e u n iv e rs e is m e a n in g
less as a w h o le , i t is m eaningless in its p a rts . B u t “ B ad,”
le t a lo n e “ bad ,” m eans so m e thin g, th e re fo re . •
198 Defects of Zen
Whether the universe is Good or Bad is of course
decided subjectively; our “objective” evaluation of each
individual’s subjectivity is decided by consideration? of
his sensibiUty, depth, and strength in their various
proportions, for example, Christina Rossetti^ longing
for death, the life-thrill of Lawrence, Arnold’s resigna
tion，Wordsworth’s joy, Christ’s extremes of fatherly
love and divine forsaking, Virgil’s lacrimae rerum,
Nietzsches amor fati, Kierkegaard^ fear and trembling,
the destiny of Spengler, the purposelessness of Kafka,
Eckhart’s godhead, Shakespeare’s tale told by an idiot,
一 to these must be added the sublime nonchalance of
Zen, but both sublimity and nonchalance are attained
at a cost. Every religion involves an insensibility to
certain things. For Christians in general, and Roman
Catholics in particular, the infinite and eternal suffer
ing of animals is not a matter for religious meditation.
Buddhists groan out their sutras heedless of the cantatas
of Bach. It is difficult for a poet or an artist or a
musician to attain enlightenment, perhaps impossible;
he may, indeed he must, be born with something like
it. A soldier, a horse-slaughterer, a politician, a doctor,
the principal of a school, a hedge-parson, a business
man, a jockey, a lawyer, an airman,—these should
all get enlightenment so as to make money or bamboozle
people or murder one another, directly or indirectly,
with the utmost efficiency, but they need also something
that will make them change their professions, and this
is not Zen. After all, an incompetent, dissatisfied
carpenter is “better” than an expert, complacent
cosmetics manufacturer.
What is the standard by which we judge all things,
judge Zen itself, which is the essence of Christianity,
the essence of Buddhism? It is not morality, or
aesthetics, or science; it is “poetry,” a faculty by which
we know the living truth, the value of a thing or person
or action, or manner. All real Zen is poetry, but not
all poetry is Zen. It is poetry by which we live, more
Illusion 199
o r less, b y w h ic h w e e nd ure th e lo v e o f others, and

e n jo y th e m a lic e o f th e u n ive rse . P o e try tra n sm u te s
e v e ry th in g in to its e lf, b u t p o e try is a k in d o f p a in ,
w hose d e p th re co nciles us to it.
Is th e w o rld bad, o r Bad? Thom as H a rd y th o u g h t
i t w as B ad, and th a t fo r th is v e ry reason i t gives us
an o p p o rtu n ity fo r tra g ic in te g rity . I f th e w o rld is B ad,
le t each m an do zazen, and g et h is s a to ri, p la y and
lis te n to th e F o rty -e ig h t P re lu d e s and F ugues; p a in t
p ic tu re s and lo o k a t th e best o f o th e rs d a ily ; le a rn th e
m ost d is ta n t fo re ig n language, and read its p o e try in
th e o rig in a l; b u ild h is o w n house, o r a t le a st a d o g -
ke n n e l; c lim b h ills o r h ig h trees, o r jo in th e fire -
b rig a d e ; be a v e g e ta ria n and an o u t-a n d -o u t (im p o s
sib le ) p a c ifis t. I f a m an ca nn ot do these th in g s , he m ay
creep in a p e tty pace to d eath, o r ju m p o u t o f th e
w in d o w , as H e m in g w a y d id . A s p iritu a lly dead o r
u n b o rn m an m akes th e g re a te st a rt and re lig io n lo o k
w h a t i t is a n yw a y, fo o lis h .
W hen w e re je c t fo lly , re g re t, sham e, h e s ita tio n , sin,
egoism , v a n ity , se n tim e n t, h y p o c ris y , a m b itio n , d ic h o
t o m y , w e re je c t o u r h u m a n ity . I t is too b ig a p ric e
to p ay fo r th e peace th a t passeth u n d e rs ta n d in g . ^F re e
dom is best/* said M rs. S tubbs, lo o k in g a t th e p ic tu re
o f h e r dead husband. Yes, fre e d o m is best, b u t a tta c h
m en t is b e tte r. To d ie fo r lo ve , o r liv e w ith o u t i t —
w h a t a choice w e m u s t m a k e ! B u t th e re is no o th e r
a lte rn a tiv e . Y o u say, “ H o w a b o u t liv in g w ith lo ve ? ”
The w o rld is n o t a rra n g e d lik e th a t. A s B y ro n said,
A ll tra g e d ie s a re fin is h e d b y a dea th;

A ll com edies a re ended b y a m a rria g e :
T he fu tu re states o f b o th a re le ft to fa ith .
A d ro w n in g m an w ill c lu tc h a t a Zen s tra w . To be

sa tisfie d w ith one self, a lia s th e w o rld ,— is n o t th is
P aradise? A n d i t is w h a t Zen o ffe rs to e v e ry m an.
B u t is th e u n iv e rs e as s h a llo w and ca llo u s and s tu p id
200 Defects of Zen
as I am? I f yo u te ll m e I am e ver so deep and com
passionate and o m n iscie n t, re a lly , I can o n ly answ er,
“ R e a lly ? ” T he otherness o f God, th e e v o lu tio n th e o ry ,
th e d o c trin e o f o rig in a l sin, and n ih ilis m a re m ore a t
tra c tiv e th a n th is re lig io u s m egalom ania, th is cosm ic
bum ptiousness. T he Zen m asters have no doubts abo ut
(th e in te rp re ta tio n s o f) th e ir e xperience. A C h ris tia n
does n o t d o u b t th e p e rfe c tio n o f C h ris t, o r th e good
in te n tio n s o f th e D e ity . B u t w hen C h ris t on th e cross
doubts th e lo v e o f God, and w he n H a k u in doubts th e
e n lig h te n m e n t o f G anto, w ho scream ed so lo u d in h is
d e a th -a g o n y,一 th e n I have no d o u b t o f them .
F in a lly , th e Zen answ er to th e above c ritic a l
querulousness is e x a c tly th e same as th a t o f th e C a th o lic
C hu rch . A ll th e c o n tra d ic tio n s , m o n stro sitie s, a b s u rd i
tie s, im m o ra litie s , and triv a litie s o f th e h u m a n -d iv in e
re la tio n a re “ m yste rie s.” E v e ry c ritic is m w e m ake o f
Zen is y e t a n o th e r d ich o to m y, w h ic h w e m ust transcend.
B u t th is is a s e lf-c o n tra d ic tio n in th e ide a o f Zen its e lf,
fo r Zen is n o t m e re ly th e a b o litio n o f d iffe re n ce , b u t
th e n e g a tio n o f sameness. To p u t i t in a m ore p ra c tic a l
w a y, Zen liv e s life and in so d o in g e xp la in s it. B u t
as hum an beings, n o t a nim a ls m e re ly , w e m ust e x p la in
life , and th is e x p la n a tio n m akes us liv e o u r life (and
in so d o in g e x p la in it ) m ore tr u ly and d eeply. Thus,
th in k in g a bo ut Zen, c ritic is in g Zen, (Zen its e lf, n o t
m ere accretions o r m a lfo rm a tio n s ) sh ow ing th e defects
o f Zen, d am nin g Zen, th is is also Zen. Zen is n o t some
th in g th a t e xists, y e t; i t is a lw a ys abo ut to be. T ru th
is a cre a tio n , n o t a d isco ve ry. Som etim es, w he n I lo o k
a t m y dog G uppy, a v e ry c le v e r dog, I th in k h ow u n
in te llig e n t he loo ks,— fo r a hum an b eing ! Zen is lik e
G uppy.
EPILOGUE
W hen w e th in k o ve r th e episodes in w h ic h th e Zen

m aster and h is p u p ils p la y th e ir p a rts, w e can see th a t
th e re are v a rio u s types o f m in ds, in b o th te a ch e r and
d isciples, and th e re s o lu tio n o f th e dou bts and d iffic u l
tie s fa ll in to se ve ra l p a tte rn s . I t w o u ld be q u ite w ro n g
and u n -Z e n -lik e fo r us to assume, as is in v a ria b ly done,
th a t th e re is one “ tru th ,” one e n lig h te n m e n t, one tru e
state o f m in d , “ one lig h t th a t e n lig h te n e th e v e ry m an
th a t com eth in to th e w o rld ,” one Zen, one B u dd h a
n a tu re ,
One fa r- o ff d iv in e e ve n t
To w h ic h th e w h o le c re a tio n m oves.
Freedom fro m oneness is m ore im p o rta n t, in th e lo n g

ru n , th a n th e fre e d o m fro m d iv e rs ity w h ic h is th e a im
o f a ll re lig io n and science. I t is h e re th a t p o e try and
e x is te n tia lis m com e to o u r a id . E ven a nim ism , w ith
o u t w h ic h no m an can be saved, is in dan ge r o f becom
in g anim a m u n d i. T hus each anecdote, each q ue stion ,
each answ er m u s t be re -liv e d in its ow n w a y and in
o u r ow n w a y. N o system , no s y m b o lis a tio n , no tric k s ,
no p e rp e tu a l p a ra d o x o r d e sire to astonish a re to be
a llo w e d . E v e ry b lo w has a d iffe re n t m eaning, ju s t as
e v e ry sh o w e r o f ra in is d iffe re n t fro m e v e ry o th e r.
P ra is in g o r b la m in g , la u g h in g o r w ee pin g, each case
has its ow n u n iq u e m ea nin g. “ B u t a t th e b a ck o f a ll
o f th e m . . . ^ A s G oethe said to E cke rm a nn , “ D o n o t,
I beg yo u , lo o k b e h in d phenom ena.”
T h e re are, h o w e ve r, tw o w ays in w h ic h w e can
p re v e n t p eo ple fro m g o in g b e h in d phenom ena, th a t is,
202 Epilogue
se p a ra tin g (in life ) th e a b s tra c t fro m th e concrete

and th u s s p o ilin g b o th . A c c o rd in g to Zen th e o ry , A
is A , and A is n o t A ; fu rth e r, A is A because i t is n o t
A (b u t s u re ly A is n o t A also because A is A ? ) . Thus
th e tw o w ays are to show th a t A is A , and th a t A is
not A.
A s tic k is w h a t y o u see i t to be, o f a c e rta in co lo u r,
shape, le n g th , w e ig h t, re s ilie n c e , and so on. I t is also
a c o n g lo m e ra tio n o f atom s o r e le c tric p a rtic le s . I t m ay
also be God h im s e lf, o r a n o n -s tic k , o r an o rn a m e n ta l
appendage. The im p o rta n t th in g is to see th e u n
d iv id e d , u n a bstra cted , m a te ria l-s p iritu a l s tic k , a t one
and th e same m om en t th e L o n g B o d y o f God, and some
th in g fo r F itz g e ra ld to p oke in to th e spokes o f th e
w h e e l o f th e b ic y c le o f a b o y w ho is im p u d e n t enough
to rid e on th e pavem ent. H o w can th is be done? B y
a tte n d in g to each th in g w ith a ll o u r m in d and h e a rt
and so ul and senses. H o w e xh a u stin g ! B u t th is is
w h a t w e do w hen w e eat, o r sneeze, o r fa ll in love , o r
sleep. A fte r a ll, w h a t w ea rie s us is d o in g w h a t w e don’t
w a n t to do. W hen m y m o th e r to ld m e to tid y up m y
toys, I re a lly fe lt a d e a d ly e xh a u stio n ; I said I was
tire d , b u t she w o u ld re m a rk , som ew hat a c id ly ，“ Y ou
w e re n ’t tire d u n til I to ld yo u to cle a r up y o u r th in g s !，，
W e have to see and hea r and sm e ll and ta ste and
have se xua l re la tio n s w ith A as A ; A as n o t A ; and
as b o th to g e th e r, th a t is to say, a lte rn a te ly and s im u l
tane ou sly. T h is s o rt o f th in g can be illu s tra te d b y th e
sentences o f th e Z e n rin k u s h u , w h ic h indeed consists
m a in ly o f th e th re e k in d s . F o r th e firs t, A is A , fro m
th e H e k ig a n ro k u :
一二三四五六。
One, tw o , th re e , fo u r, fiv e , s ix .
雲冉冉水漫漫。
C louds are m o vin g ,
W aters are s w e llin g .
Epilogue 203
A is n o t A :
兎馬有角牛羊無角。
R a b b its and horses h ave h o rn s;

Cows and sheep have none.
陸地行舟虚空馳馬。
N a v ig a tin g a sh ip on d ry g ro un d,
R id in g a horse th ro u g h th e e m p ty a ir.
A is n o t A , and a t th e same tim e A is A :
細雨湿衣看不見，
閑花落地聴無声。
F in e ra in w ets th e garm ents, b u t th o u g h w e gaze

i t cannot be seen;
The flo w e rs q u ie tly fa ll to th e g ro un d, b u t th o u g h
w e lis te n , w e cannot h ea r it.
The firs t is fa c t, th e second p a ra d o x, th e th ird p o e try .

T his p o e try , w h ic h is also Zen, is th e p o e try o f W o rd s
w o rth and T horeau. I t is th e h ig h e s t possible fo rm o f
life , and som ehow m u st be c a rrie d o ver, as in S hake
speare, to th e w o rld o f hum an beings, w ho liv e i t in
so fa r as th e y re a lly liv e a t a ll. W h e th e r th is good
life can be liv e d w ith o u t a n y re fe re n c e to n a tu re , w ith
o u t a deep and co n sta n t lo v e o f it , is a que stion . The
C hinese Zen m onks, and th e Japanese a fte r th em , u n lik e
th e C h ris tia n , p re se rve d them selves fro m e g o -c e n tric ity
b y a co n sta n t re fe re n ce to n a tu ra l phenom ena as ju s tify
in g b o th th e ir (a p p a re n tly ) excessive m a te ria lity , and
s p iritu a lity .
W h a t is Zen? Zen is th e u n s y m b o lis a tio n o f th e w o rld
and a ll th e th in g s in it. O f course, th e Zen m asters use
m eta ph o rs and s im ile s , th e y even use sym bols, b u t these
a re n o t to be ta k e n s e rio u s ly . One th in g does n o t m ean
a n o th e r. A b o v e a ll, as w as said b efo re , w e a re n o t to lo o k
204 Epilogue
b e h in d th in g s fo r th e ir m eaning. W hen th e hand is ra is

ed, a ll th in g s are raised w ith it, b u t th e hand does n o t
s ig n ify a ll th in g s. W hen tea is d ru n k , th e u n iv e rs e is
sw a llo w e d ; th e tea is th e u n iv e rs e ; i t does n o t stand fo r
it. In this sense, animism is the sine qua non for Zen,
but we must also say that a man is a tree walking. A
hum an being is as su b je ct to cause and e ffe ct as th e
lo w lie s t existence. A stone is as fre e as a seraph. W hen
i t ra in s , C h ris t’s b lo od fa lls fro m th e firm a m e n t. Zen
m eans th e free do m to be b ound; w e are bound b y a ll
w ith in and w ith o u t us. W e ca nn ot escape fro m a th in g ,
as P la to trie d to , on th e w in g s o f an a b stra ctio n , a
F orm , a fu n c tio n . One th in g contains e v e ry th in g w ith in
it, and n o th in g can be w ith d ra w n fro m i t w ith o u t in
ju r y to its e lf and to th e w ith d ra w e r. W h a t m a tte rs
th e re fo re abo ut any th in g is its allness. T h is is perhaps
a t th e back o f th e m odern d is lik e o f a d je ctive s, especial
ly th e w o n d e rfu l a d je ctive s beloved o f K eats and
Tennyson. A d je c tiv e s soon becom e a b stra ct nouns (as
in “ allness” above) and th e w o rld is im p o ve rish e d to
cram th e hum an b ra in w ith non -e xisten ces, le a v in g
m eaningless m a tte r to be exam ined fo r a m eaning. God
is n o t love . God is n o t lo v in g . God is som eone lo v in g
som ething, o r som ething lo v in g someone. In th e be
g in n in g was no w o rd , n e ith e r was th e re , as F aust
asserts, any act. In th e b e g in n in g was a speaker, an
actor. In th is m a tte r C h ris tia n ity and even M oham
m edanism is rig h t, and B u d d h ism and Zen are w ro ng .
God is a person, and H eaven is a place. C o n tra ry to
the B ook o f R e ve la tio n , w ith o u t tim e n o th in g can e xist,
e sp e cia lly th e tim eless, and “ E te rn ity is in lo v e w ith
th e p ro d u ctio n s o f tim e .”
INDEX
Buddhism, 53
absolute and relative, 24
Bukan, 10, 159
Adamson, Mrs., 12
Bunen, 114
Al-Ghazzalit 173
Bunyan, 166, 197
Alice in Wonderland, 7, 79
Byron, viii, 125, 199
Amida Sutrat 99
animals, 12, 96, 136, 189
animism, 36, 64, 97, 179, 197 cause and effect, 20, 21
Ankoku, 54 Changching, see Chokei
Ankuo, see Ankoku Changsheng, see Chosei
Arnold, M., 177 Changtzu, see Choshi
Changyueh, see Zengetsu
Bach, vi, 61, 69, 83, 179, 196, 199 Chaolun, see Joron
ball-rolling, 42 Chiao, see Gaku
Baicha- 〇f 35 Chiashan, see Kassan
Bashd Matsuo, 32 Chigan, 11
Baso, 18, 21, 79, 97, 160 Chigi, 116
beating, 40, 48, 89 Chihwei, see Ch'ii
believing, 58 Chihyen, see Chigan
bell, 106, 131 Chii, 11
Benka, 107 Chii, see Chigi
Bind, 33 Chingching, see K yoei
Bhagavat, 61 Chingyuan, see Seigen
Bhutathata, 104 Chiufeng, 107
Bird-nest Zenji, 11 Chokei, 57
Birds* Way, 95 ChSsei, 39, 44
Blake, 1, 32, 115, 120, 122, 158, Chosetsu, 70
161, 169, 173， 191, 192 Choshi, 27
blind turtle, 138 Christianity, v ， vi, 5, 7, 10， 20
Bokuju, 114 23, 27, 30, 31, 37， 44， 45, 49
Book of the Dead, 158 51, 52, 53, 68, 70, 73, 79, 83
Browning, 125, 164, 182 93, 96, 100, 101, 105, 106, 108
Buddha, 1, 11, 36, 41, 121, 130, 115, 116, 122, 126, 129, 133
142, 174 144, 155, 162, 173, 185, 187
Buddha, absolute, 67, 86, 115, 188, 196， 197， 198, 200
153 Chunshan, see Kinzan
Buddha Hall, 63 Chuantsu, see Sensu
Buddha nature, vi, 51, (Chapter) Chuangtse, 17, 170
190 Clare ， 161， 186, 196
Buddha, what is, 30 comparison, 70
206 Index
concrete and abstract, 131 Eno, 1, 15, 61, 67, 120

Confucianism, 10 Euripides, 190
Cow-herding Pictures, 19 existentialism, 41, Chapter X X II,
Cowper, 162, 182 172
eye, 129
Eye o f the Law, 58
Dainei, 25
Daiten, 25
danapati， 65 Fayen, s ee Hogen
Dante, 142, 188 Fengkwan, s e e Bukan
Daruma from West, 51, 78, 79, Fenyang, s e e Funyo
83, 111, 116, 119 Fields, W.C., 47
das Heilige, 115 filial piety, 101, 106
dead monks* clothes, 73 Five Commandments, 131
death, 64, 81, 84, 89, 95, 101, 103 Five Periods, 117
definite and indefinite, 39 Five Ranks, 3
Dengyo Daishi, 12 flowers of the eye, 59
Dharma Body, 143 Four Elements, 148
Dharmakaya, 48, 118 Four Mountains, 101
D iam ond Sutra, 30, 68 Four Nirvana Virtues, 117
Dickens, 158 Four Statements, 93, 94
Ddgen, 50 Four Unchangeables, 27
Dogo, 81, 82, 83 Freud, 165
D5rin, 11 Fudaishi, 14
Ddshin, 9, 10 Funyo, 134
doubt, 184
Doyo, 109
dragon, 108, 109 Ganto, 31, 40, 200
Genkei, 14
Ean, 13 Genkaku, 16
Earthly Paradise, 162 Gensha, 42, 50, 96
Echo, 67, 97 gimlet, 114
Echu, 12 gnomic verses, 149
Eckhart, 63, 174, 195 gnosticism, 158
ego, 177 Goei, 92
Eho, 11 Goethe, 153, 201
Eimyo, 75, 77 Gozu, 116, 139
Emerson, 117， 136, 174 Gozu Zen, 2, 11 ff.
Empson, 194 Gunin, s ee Konin
Emptiness, 131
Enan, 112 hair-tip, 54
Engo, 75, 117 Haku, 94
Enjudo, s ee Nehando Hakuin, 151, 161, 182, 196
Enkan, 43 Hakurakuten, 11
enlightenment, vl, 37, 56, 58, 143 HakuyS, 67
Index 207
Hanfeitzu， 55 Isan, 83, 97, 179

H annya Sutra, 9
Hanshan, 159 Japanese, 34, 185, 196
Hanyu, s e e Kanyu Jaspers, 175
Hardy, 199 Jenchien, s ee Ninken
Haryo, 134 Jinshu, 15
Hasdda, 14 Jiz5y 59
Heidegger, 175, 181 Jizo, see Keichin
H ek ig a n rok u , 27, 33, 117, 134, 136, Johnson, Dr., 40, 130, 139
183, 202 Joron, 27, 66, 146
Hell, 178 Joshu, 10, 20, 41
Herbert, 119 Juliana, 47, 103
Hiju, 143 Junfuno, 90
Hitler, 181
Hofuku, 56, 59, 61
Kafka, 171, 175, 197
Hogen, 26, 53, 66
Kaingo, s e e Tozan
Hogen Sect, 75
Kaku, 2, 105; 70, 71
H okyoza m m ai, 152
Kankei, 84
Honjaku, 104
Kannon, 65, 116, 122, 127
Hoshi Chord, 69
Kanyu, 25
Hotse, s ee Kataku
Kanzan, s e e Hanshan
Houn, 20
Kaoting, s e e Kotei
Hsiangtien, s ee Zoden
Kassan, 38, 86
Hsiangyen, s e e Kyogen
Kataku, 17
Hsingshan, see Kyozan
Kataku Zen, 2
Hsiushan, s e e Shuzan
Keats, 197
Hsuanchueh, s e e Genkaku
Kegon, 19
Hsuehfeng, s e e Seppo
K e g o n S u trat 98
Huchiu, s e e Kokjru
Keichin, 66
Huian, s e e Ean
Keicho, 17
Huichao, s e e Echo
Kemp5, 126
Huichung, s e e Echu
Kierkegaard, 133, 163, 175, 176,
Huifang, s e e Eh5 179, 184
Human, 112
killing, 121
human nature, Chapter X X IV ,
Kinzan, 31
190
Klee, vi
humour, 179
knife, 20, 102
K5, 50
Igyo Sect, 19 K okyu, 48
illness ， 82, 105, 128, 129 KomyS, Empress, 58
immortality, 42, 97， 107 Konin (or G unin), 11, 13, 112
Indra Heaven, 135 Korea, 76, 112, 140
insentient teaching, 97 K5s5, 32
interpenetration, 133 Kotei, 87
208 Index
K uanchi ， see Kankei m onk’s age, 26

Kuang, see K o morality, vii, 44, 45
Kueifeng, see Keiho Morality, 110
Kutta Sanzd, 16 mountains, 161
Kuzan, 55 movement, 38
Kyogen, 108 Mozart, 179, 182
Kyogen, 122 Muchou, see Bokuju
Kydsei, 46， 60 Mugo, 182
Ky5zan 杏山， 28 Mujodd, see Nehando
Ky5zan 仰山， 28 Mumonkan, 105, 151
Kyuho, 107 Myosho, see Meisho
mysteries, 174
mysticism， Chapter X X II, 170
Lankavatara Sutra, 61
Laotse, 17, 100, 149, 186 Nangaku, 18, 126, 160
Lawrence, 35, 36, 44, 120, 179, Nangen, 101
190 Nansen, 97, 195
Lear, 22, 141 Nanyo, 2, 97
Letan, 30 Nanyueh, see Nangaku
Lewis Carroll, 141 Nature, Chapter X X IV , 190
Liingshu ， see Reiju Nehando, 85
lion, 36, 137 Nembutsu, 19, 75, 77
Lohan, (K ueichen) ， see Rakan Nietzsche, 30, 58, 120, 175, 179,
Lohan, (Shou jen ), see Rakan, 182, 185
Shujin Ninken, 13
long-beaked birds, 133 Nirvana, 5, 174, 175
Loshan, see Razan Nirvana Hall, see Nehando
love, 44， 75 Nirvana Sutrat 55, 117
Lungtan, see Hyutan Niutou, see Gozu
Nyogen Senzaki, 87
Mahakasyapa， 110
Manjusri， 28， 137 ox, 65, 100, 123, 144
Mansfield, 199 oryu School, 112
Marcel, 75 Over-soul, 172
mathematics, 119, 127, 128
Matsu, see Baso Paif see Haku
Matt Dillon, 100 Paiyang, see Hakuy5
Meisho, 35 Paling, see Haryo
Mencius, v Pangyun, see Houn
Mingchao, see Meisho Paofu, see Hofuku
Minwang, see Bino Pascal, 175
Mirror, 77 pecking, 60
mirror, 91 Penchi, see Honjaku
monism, 195 peonies, 59
Index 209
Pienho, 55 Seven Schools, 112

Pilgrim^ Progress, 94 sex, viii
Po Chui, 14, 146 Shakespeare, 21, 46, 73, 111, 133.
182, 195, 198
poetic nature, Chapter X X IV Shaoshan, see Shozan
poetry, 133 Shelley, 38
post, 119, 133 Shifuku, 43
prophecy, 18 Shihshih, see Sekishitsu
questions, 19，39, 40, 52, 137 Shingyd, 92
Shinjimmei, 72, 151
Shihshuang, see Sekiso
Rakan, the, 24
Shiht§, 159
Rakan (K eichin), 53, 66
Shihtou, see Sekito
Rakan (Shujin), 77
Shoddka, 17
Razan, 25, 33, 34, 35
Shouchou, see Tozan
Reiju, 141
Shoyorokut 71
Reishu, 50
Reiun, 122 Shozan, 89, 135
religion, my, 183, 187 Shuzan, 71
Six Accomplishments, 164
Rhinoceros Fan, 43
Rinzai, 12 Six Ferries, 119
Six Roots, 113
R5an Zen, 2， 13
Smith, Sidney, 142
Rokutan, 30
rosary, 25 society, 180
Rossetti, Christina, 19 Sdgen, see Sokei
Ryutan, 29 S5kei, 69, 120, 128
Sdmitsu, 94
S5t5 School, 3, 5
Saizen, 129
S5t5 Zen, 34
Samantabhadra (Fugen), 137
Sandokai, 20, Chapter X V in , 146 Southwell, Robert, 183
sarcasm, 130 S5zan, 104
sarira, 113 special teaching, 90, 122, 140
Scale of Perfection, 181 speed, 62
seamless tower, 145 Spengler, 198
Seccho, 151 Sramana, 123
Seigen ， 18， 105 Sravaka, 40
Sekishitsu, 20， 28 staff, 116, 132, 133, 134
Sekiso, 33, 82, 86 Stevenson, 5， 20, 32， 45, 134
Sekit5, 20, 80, 146 St. Jerome, 10
Sengai, 183 stone woman, 157
Sengchao, 146 Sufi, 106
Sengmi, see Somitsu Suibi, 24
Sensu, 86 Sumeru, Mount, 121
Senzaki Nyogen, 87 Suzuki, Daisetz, 176, 195
SeppS, 32, 39, 55, 96 sword, 107, 134
210 Index
symbolism, 112 Trailokya， 34

symbols, 4, 56 Tree o f K nowledge, 156
Tree of the World, 157
Taigen, 55 Trikaya
Taining, see Dainei Trinity, 155, 179
Taiyuan, se e Taigen Triple Synopsis, 95
Tanhsia, s e e Tanka T santungchi, see Sanddkai
Tanka, 22 Ts'aoshan, s e e Sozan
Taohsuan, s e e Dogen Tsuiwei, se e Suibi
Taoism, 23 Tsunpuna, s e e Junfuno
Taolin, s ee Dorin Tungshan, s e e Tozan
Taoying, s ee D5yo Twelve Nidana^, 38
Taowu, s e e D5go Tzuhuo, s e e Shifuku
Tathagata, 68
Tatien, s ee Daiten Ummon ， 61, 114 ff.
tea, vii Ummon Sect, 76
teacher o f the Buddhas, 24, 110 Ungai, 83
teaching, 80, 141 Ungan, 81, 92, 98, 99
Tendai, 160 Ungo, 109
Tendai Sect, 116, 127 Upanishads, 1, 172
Tendai Tokucho, 75
ten g o, 102
Vasubandhu, 132
Tenjiku, 25
Tenno, 29 Vinaya, 92
tenzo, 29 Weishan, s e e Isan
Tennyson, 201 Wenyen, s e e Bunsen
the Way, 88, 108, 127, 135, 185 Whitman, 57
Thompson, 177 wooden man, 157
Thoreau, 10, 18, 24, 26, 34, 121, words, 61, 93, 154
126, 134, 142, 156, 158, 161, Wordsworth, 36， 46， 73, 90， 97,
171, 175, 176, 177, 181 109, 116, 117, 139, 161, 177,
Three Realms, 34 178, 182, 185
Three Worlds, 34 Wuhsieh, s e e Goei
Tienchu, s e e Tenjiku Wukung, s e e Goku
Tienhuang, see Tenno Wuyeh, s e e Mugo
Tientai, 158
Tientai, Mount, 160 Yakusan, 79, 184
Tientai, Teshao, s ee Tendai To- Yangshan, see Kyozan
kuch5 Yenkuan, s ee Enkan
Tokusan, 6， 29, 43 Yentou, s ee GantS
Tolstoy, 190 Yoka, 2
T6su (or T ‘outsu) ， 43, 65 Yuankuei, s e e Genkei
T5zan, 40, 43， 87, 92， 152 Yueshan, s e e Yakusan
Tozan Shusho, 142
Index 211
Y u ik y o Sutra, 144 Zen, Japanese, 38

Y u ish ik iro n t 132 Zen, playing at, 137
Yungcho, s ee Ungo Zen, teaching, 88, 90
Yunkai ， s e e Ungai Zen, test of, 51
Yunyen, s e e Ungan Zen, w h a t it is, 53 ， 118 ， 165， 181
Yunmen, s e e Ummon Zen and words, 44, 56

Zen clumsiness, 114
Zabutsu, 19 Zen not enough, 45
Zen Sect, 14
Zazen ， 19
Z em m on Kdan Taisci, 114
Zengetsu, 135, 160
Zenrinku shu , 202
Zen, aim of, 10, 19
Zen, American, 87 Zoden, 37
Zen, definition of, 35, 40, 110 Zuigan, 38
Zen, five types, 17
Zen, grumbling, 164
B y R. H . B ly th
HAIKU Vols. I~ IV
A HISTORY OF HAIKU Vols. I, II
SENRYU
JAPANESE LIFE AND CHARACTER IN SENRYU
EDO SATIRICAL VERSE ANTHOLOGIES
ORIENTAL HUMOUR
ZEN IN ENGLISH LITERATURE AND ORIENTAL
CLASSICS
ZEN AND ZEN CLASSICS Vols. I, II，[II, IV, V
A SURVEY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE
HUMOUR IN ENGLISH LITERATURE
—A Chronological Anthology—
EASY POEMS I, II
HOW TO READ ENGLISH POETRY
DOROTHY WORDSWORTHS JOURNALS
(With Introduction and footnotes)
A WEEK ON THE CONCORD AND MERRIMACK
RIVER (Shortened, with Introduction and Notes)
THIS VOLUME purports to be the
History of Zen from
Eno to Ummon, that is, of the Seigen
branch of the double-forked tree of Zen.
The history of Zen is the history of
moments. It cannot be, like the history
of ideas, or even the history of the
freedom of thought, an account of devel
opment, systematisation, criticism, modi
fication, replacement, and so forth. Zen
seems to become deeper sometimes, shal
lower, broader, narrower sometimes, but
there is no progress of the ordinary kind.
It is a history only in the sense of being
a list of names of great men in the
attainment of greatness in words or deeds
or manner of life. And from the Zen
point of view, where the life-activity is
both absolute and relative, silent and
speaking, Godly and manly, placeless and
placeful, timeless and timeful, in one,
Tokusan, Seppo, Hogen and Ummon, for
example, are far greater than Christ or
Buddha or Confucius, not to speak of
Plato, Dante, and Shakespeare.
5N 0-89346-205-5

Zen and Zen Classics 2 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Zen and Zen Classics 2 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

R.H.

THE HOKUSEIDO PRESS

Two naked children are rejoicing in the

Vol. I General Introduction, From the Upanishads

THE HOKUSEIDO PRESS

First Printing, 1964

Published by The Hokuseido Press

Heian International, Inc.

This volume purports to be the History of Zen from

Two Moons, by Sengai....................................Frontispiece

Kanzan and Jittoku, by Sengai ......................... 161〜 162

THE FIVE SECTS

The history of Zen is the history of moments. It

kiss the joy as it flies,

From Nangaku, it is Baso, Hyakujo, obaku, Rinzai;

⑴ 正中偏： The Absolute becomes the Relative;

2. See page 152 for a translation.

Nansen’s disciple Joshu and Hyakujo^ disciple

Sei gen Nan^gaku

Ummon Joshu Oblku

Tenno^ chief disciple was Ryutan. With Ryutan be­

The breeze from the embalmed land

After his enlightenment by having the fire put out,

From the Seigen branch come three of the five Zen

(the records of) Christ. Igyo (Weiyang) Zen was

GOZU ZEN AND ROAN ZEN

I Daruma Before describing the division

morning, and every evening brought back a heavy load

Not to do any evil,

Hakurakuten said, “Any child of three knows this.”

Thoughts and ideas are illusory;

1 Our nature is without beginning or end;

If you understand the meaning of this,

There is no wise or foolish, no Buddha or common

Hasoda Genkei Ninken

audience by the Emperor K6s6, 高 宗 ， he avoided him

ENO AND HIS DISCIPLES

The division, after the 5th Patriarch, into two schools

What an idea, restricting the body to sitting all the

Kataku Genkaku Nany5 Kutta Nangaku Seigen

Genkaku (Hsiianchueh) 玄覚 ， was one 〇f the most

described in the Platform Sutra，1 is perhaps the most

3. Letter to Wiley, 1856. 4. Letter to Blake, 1855.

Dai ten Choshi Tanka Yakusan

Tanka (T an h sia) 丹霞， 738-824, was the disciple of

R^an (Keichin) Kyorin Tozan (Shusho)

said, “If there were no father, no child would be born.”

they are all folly and vulgarity, and naturally go to­

rosary is as it is, neither holy nor unholy; like God, it

1. Gain final enlightenment.

Tenno and Yakusan are im portant in themselves, and

Tokusan holds a staff in his hand, not the

T h e rain falls upon the just and upon the

Rinzai means that in other tem ples people

heard the name Ryutan (Dragon-Abyss) for a long

When he was on a “pngrimage，” that is, visiting great

This reminds us two things from the Bible, PauVs

1. Ch*ang-an. 2. A merchant who captured Ch*ang-an, and was

Razan could not grasp the meaning, and went to Ganto

When I am condemned and condemn myself utter­

to nothing. The next day he tried again, but Razan

came here,” said Meishd， “to whom did you intend to

2 . There seem to be no accounts of the life of this “ Elephant-

Tenno^ chief disciple was Ryutan. With Ryutan be

audience by the Emperor K6s6, 高宗， he avoided him

Genkaku (Hsiianchueh) 玄覚， was one 〇f the most

they are all folly and vulgarity, and naturally go to

1. Chang-an. 2. A merchant who captured Chang-an, and was

When I am condemned and condemn myself utter

feitzu 韓非子， Book IV, 13, The Difficulty of Pienho. A man

ally?^ Kuzan said, uWhat has this to do with ra

1. The Chinese metaphor i s , 失銭遭罪， “ To lose money is a

H6gen (F a y e n ) 法眼， the founder of the branch of

The style of the Hogen Sect was said to be like fight

Sensu (Ch‘u an tzii) 船子 , dates unknown, was a co

h o ld in g an a n n iv e rs a ry m e e tin g fo r B a so^ d eath. N a n

16. This sentence• 某甲参堂去 , can also be interpreted, “I am go

^R e tu rn to th e absolute, to n a tu re , to th e u n d iffe re n tia t

S6zan (T s ‘a o s h a n )曹山，firs t stu d ie d C on fucianism ,