Good afternoon. This morning I talked about the story of the dog's literature and who and who, with several varieties of the story. And I took two traditional interpretations of this story. And one is in Momonkan, traditionally used in Rinzai tradition and another is Shōyō-roku or Book of Serenity. These two are very different. Now I need to talk on Dōgen Zenji's interpretation of this story. Maybe one thing I have to say before talking about this is better to forget everything I said this morning.

[01:06]

It's so different. Page 91, the last paragraph of page 91. I first read the first half of the story and his comment. That is about, in this case, no good nature. Amongst us, Chouchu, Chunchi, Tashi, that is Joshi, Does that dog have the Buddha nature or not?

[02:07]

The meaning of this question must be clarified. It asks neither whether a dog has the Buddha nature or whether it does not have the Buddha nature. It asks, does a man of iron still practice the way? Chouchu, or Joshu, blundered into a poisoned camp, and his resentment may be intense, but it is a means of seeing half a real thing at last, after 30 years. Joshu said, new or known, hearing this word, of course, the course of practice to be pursued opened up. The moon, the Buddha nature declares itself to be. The moon, the dog declares itself to be.

[03:12]

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

[04:19]

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

[05:31]

Dogen Zenji succeeded. That story consists of two parts. In one part, in the Shōryō Roku, first Joshu said U, and second Joshu said Mu. But here, Dogen Zenji changed the order. And I think this has something I mean if Joshu first say Wu and then Mu the interpretation by Tansho Joshu or even Wanshi that first Joshu gave the jewel and next take it away but if Mu is first then that interpretation is not possible. I think that is

[06:35]

So Dogen didn't say anything about this change of order, but we must be very careful about this. And this is, I think, this is my guess that this is the same as the, you know, in Section 8 and 9, Dogen discussed about incomes, living beings have and I introduced a story from Shinji Shobo Genzo, or Three Hundred Koans, entitled Shobo Genzo, collected by Dogen. But somehow Dogen didn't quote that story. He only quoted Enkan and I-san's saying of being u-bushu and mu-bushu. So she cut off the part of two monks who talked with Yangshan or Zhou-san.

[07:43]

That is, you know, I-san said all living beings have no Buddha nature and Enkan said all living beings have Buddha nature or u-bushu. and two monks from Enkan's assembly visited Isan and tried to figure out what Isan means, but they couldn't, and they thought Isan teaching is not a really Buddhist teaching. So one day, those two monks found some major disciple, Gyo-san, and they had a conversation. And they said, it's important to study Buddhism. So don't be lazy. So you should diligently practice Buddhism. That means your teacher's teaching is not a Buddhism.

[08:47]

And your Buddha is not a Buddhism. Then, I think you remember, Gyoza made a circle with his hand on the air and the whole way and threw it away and showed his hands And he said the same thing. You know, this is Buddhism. You should be decent to practice Buddhism. Those two monks didn't understand. And Dogen Zen, I think Dogen Zen didn't like this idea. This is, again, same as I think Shoyoroku's interpretation of this koan. It's kind of two-step. First you should find the Buddha nature, then next you should take it away, or throw it away, or be free from Buddha nature. So this is a kind of two-step method. First you have to understand it, and hang it, and hold it, and yet that is not the end of the story.

[09:54]

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

[11:03]

So we must be very careful in studying what he's writing, and to study the sources or materials he used, and we need to find what he didn't imagine that he, how can I say, live it up. It's important to understand that. Robin really wanted to say. I think that is why she put the new Buddha nature first, instead of who. So the question is very familiar with us. Does that dog have the Buddha nature or not? And he said, the meaning of this question must be clarified.

[12:09]

That means it's not clear. I think, or we think the meaning of this question is very clear, whether the Buddha and dog have Buddha nature or not. What else can this question mean? Actually, this translation didn't translate one sentence, and I understand why it doesn't translate, because I also welcome translation. This is nonsense, in a common sense. The Japanese sentence is You know, the question is Yeah. This is KUSU.

[13:28]

U is have. BUSHO is Buddha nature. And, or not. So does KUSU have Buddha nature or not? And this KUSU is a Chinese word for dog. But this is not a Japanese. So Dogen said, means in Japanese word for . So he said is in. But if we translate this into English, Adobe is alone. And it's just a repetition of the same word. So it doesn't make sense to translate. And this might not. be important. But it can be very important. Dog is a dog.

[14:33]

But dog is nothing other than dog. Dog cannot be a Buddha. Dog cannot be a Buddha-nature. Dog is a dog, clearly. Same as, you know, Buddha, as Dogen said, in Shogō Genzo, Emptiness is emptiness, clear. Form is form, clear. So dog is dog, clear. It can be a very important expression, but this translator, you know, he did not, because he thinks this is simply the explanation of what kushu is for Japanese people. How do you say that again? How do you say that again? How do you say that again?

[15:35]

How do you say that again? How do you say that again? How do you say that again? Then he said, it asks neither whether a dog has the Buddha nature or whether it does not have the Buddha nature. So according to Dogen, this question is not a matter of whether a dog has the Buddha nature or not. That is really unique. He interpreted this question as, does a man of iron still practice the way The man of iron is Kek Kam. Kek Kam. Kek means iron. And Kam means man. This expression, tekkan, appeared in some texts within some koan.

[16:59]

But tekkan means the person who is really deeply determined to practice buddha way. So the question is, does or is the tekkan, is the idle person still practicing or not, means it's not a question. And tekkan means the person who is practicing. Never, constantly, never stop practicing. So is tekkan still practicing means kind of nonsense. It's not a necessary question. It's a matter of course. If the person is not practiced, he's not a tekkan or iron person.

[18:01]

So if he's a tekkan or iron person, of course he's practicing. That means this question, does Buddha have Buddha nature or not, means according to Dogen, not according to the common way of reading this sentence, but at least according to Dogen, this means does Buddha nature have Buddha nature or not. So this question is not really a question. What they are talking about, using the example of dogma's Buddha nature, is how bodhisattva, very deeply determined bodhisattva, is practicing. Joshua grounded a poisoned hand, and his resentment may be intense, but it is a means of seeing half a real saint at last, after 30 years.

[19:24]

I'm not sure what Joshua grounded a poisoned hand means in English. Branded a poison hand. That doesn't make sense. Hmm? It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense. Yeah. It doesn't make sense. Unintentionally. Accidently. Accidently. Who is she? Who is she? It sounds like a game, you know, like you take a card and then you play a card. Hmm. Blunder is a mistake. Mistake. So this means Joshua made a mistake with using a poison hand. He thought he was doing something else but blundered into a poison hand by saying what he said. So this poison hand is Joshua's hand for Agamemnon's hand.

[20:31]

Okay. Monk's hand. So he, Joshi, made a mistake to deal without holding the hand of the monk. That means monk win. Joshi rules. That's what it means. Then it's okay. Then it's okay. Can you try to say it again? Can you try to say it again? Actually, in Japanese, there's no subject. So we can't... It is hard to tell who we fool. Poison. I hear they have a meaning of poison. Poison. Yeah. I think this poison came from Soyoro. Poison in Soyoro. So this question by the monk was a poignant one. And Joshu made a mistake.

[21:36]

So he was poignant. So even in Japanese modern translation, translation to modern Japanese, depending upon the transfer. Someone said Joshu made a mistake. Someone said the monk made a mistake. My understanding is Joshu made a mistake. Joshu mistakenly dealt with this poisoned hound. And his resentment may be intense. Dr. George made a mistake. He may have intense resentment, but he said it is a means of seeing half a real saint at last, after 30 years.

[22:40]

This also came from one Zen story. this story again, one of the Vassal's disciples whose name was Sekcho Ezo. This person used to be a hunter and he was always carrying the bow and arrow, even after he took a knock. And for 30 years, whenever The monk visited him to ask for Dharma. He put an arrow on the bow and tried to shoot the parakeets. Of course, for 30 years he couldn't find any true wayseekers. But finally, one person with his name was Gitchu. And when Seikyo tried to shoot the person, he didn't escape, but he opened his clothing and asked to shoot me.

[23:53]

And this saying was by that Zen master that I have been looking for 30 years, looking for a true practitioner for 30 years, and finally I found half a person. You didn't say one person. Half a saint. Half a saint. So that means Joshu finally finds a real practitioner. So Dogen prays to the person who made this session. Does Dogen have Buddha nature or not? I think no one else said such a thing. And Joshu said, move. Hearing this word, the course of practice to be pursued opened up.

[25:00]

So move is an instruction to show how we should practice. The moon, the Buddha nature declares itself to be. The moon, the dog declares itself to be. Both must be utterances like Joseph Meek.

[25:30]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_68.66