This morning I'm going to give a talk on case number 51 in a Booklef record, which has various titles, but it's usually called, what is it? This case involves Seppo and Ganto, and two monks. Seppo and Ganto, those are the Japanese names, lived in China in the 9th century, and they're in the lineage of Daowu and Lungtan, and Dashan, or Tokusan. If you have read the newsletter, my talk in the newsletter, this month you'll recognize Tokusan as gaining enlightenment under Luntan, except that my talk

[01:26]

was disconnected and that part will be in this next class. So both Kanto and Sepo were visited or practiced with Darshan many times, and with Deng Xian many times, and so they traveled a lot to visit these two teachers who were not close together. And if you've ever been to China, you'll realize that traveling in those days, in the 9th century, any distance, because China is just full of mountains, and traveling through snow and storms, you know, they really asserted themselves and worked very hard to practice the Dharma with these teachers.

[02:35]

So eventually they became Dogasans, they received Dogasans sanction. I'm going to from Suzuki Hiroshi's commentary, which I like a lot. Of all the commentaries I've read, I like Suzuki Hiroshi's the best. So he says in the introduction, he says, Seppo, 822-908, was a good example of a well-trained master. three times a visitor to Togasan and nine times an attendant to Tozan, because it became one of the catchwords of Zen. Three times visitor to Togasan, nine times visitor to Tozan, that became a catchword in Zen, which expressed sincere practice.

[03:46]

So at that time there was a severe persecution of Buddhism, and there were a couple of severe persecutions of Buddhism. The Taoists, the Confucianists, and the Buddhists were all vying for the emperor's favor, political stuff which has always gone on, about how bad the Buddhists and the Confucianists were, and the Confucianists whispered about how bad the Buddhists and Taoists were, and I don't know what the Buddhists were doing, but probably the same thing. So, the Buddhists were out of favor at this time, and so the emperor turned out thousands and thousands of monks from the monasteries. a lot of the main Buddhist centers were destroyed.

[04:54]

And it reminds me a little of the Cultural Revolution. History repeats itself. But the Zen monks went to the mountains they had the most, because the Zen monks didn't need so much. They weren't established as teaching schools or as... They didn't have texts they were teaching to people. They were teaching practice. So they could go to the mountains and live more easily without large centers. So Seppo went to his mountain and lived in a little hut, and Ganto became boatman, it's a legend, and they were separated.

[06:01]

So this is also part of the story. They practiced together for a long time, but in the end they were separated. So Suzuki Roshi says, a severe persecution occurred when Sappo was 20 years old. Metalware throughout the land was turned into coin, including temple bells and images of Buddha. This happened during the Second World War in Japan, same thing. except the temple bells were turned into shells. 4,000 temples were destroyed and 25,000 priests were turned out, and monks and nuns were turned out, and all the other priests of other religions except the Taoists. So, the other principal character of this model subject, Ganto Senkatsu, was killed by a mob. He was a good friend of Seppo, and they had both been born in the province of Fukien, and both went on long, hard pilgrimages from northeast to southeast China, visiting many famous masters.

[07:13]

So Ganto was killed. He was in his temple, and bandits came, and I guess So it's according to legend he was sitting zazen, and they stabbed him, and he let out this shout that was heard for miles around. And Hakuen, the famous Japanese teacher, said he couldn't understand Kanto's shout, and it really bothered him for a long, long time, until he finally understood it. So later they were handed down Tokusan's transmission. And when Seppu was 44 and Ganto was 38, they left Tokusan and started pilgrimage again. And they were caught by a heavy snowstorm. They were in the mountains.

[08:15]

And so they holed up in some place, some little place. And Ganto went to sleep. And Seppo was sitting up all night. And Ganto said, what's the matter? How come you're sitting up all night? And Seppo said, well, it's because I haven't really resolved something in myself, and it just keeps bothering me. And Ganto said, well, why don't you tell me what it is you learned from Tokusan, what it is you learned from Tozan? And so Seppo started relating one by one the significant things that he'd learned from them. And Ganto stopped him at some point and he said, you know, the only thing that really matters is what you yourself bring forth as your own understanding. And Seppo was completely enlightened. There's a famous story, Ganto enlightened Seppo.

[09:19]

Ganto, the characteristics of Seppo and Ganto are quite different. Gangadhar was very intelligent, very intellectual, and he was one of those, you know, a kind of virtuoso Zen student who could do everything just right. And Seppo was a little bit slower and not quite as intelligent as Gangadhar. Ganto, and his learning ability wasn't quite as fast and so forth. But they were a good complement to each other. And in the end, Ganto had no students, and Seppo had a monastery with thousands of students and had a lot of successors, but his key to success was his humility, understanding his own qualities and limitations.

[10:27]

and so he attracted a lot of people because of his honesty and his straightforwardness about himself, but his understanding was great. Engo, who is the compiler of, Engo is the commentator on the Blue Cliff Record, and he introduced this subject. If you are caught by the slightest idea of good and bad, your mind, your essence of mind, will be lost in the realm of disorder. If you do not have an idea of the order of stages, there will be no direction in your practice. According to the Avataramsaka Sutra, there are 52 stages of Bodhisattva practice.

[11:30]

So these 52 stages outline every detail of an advancement to enlightenment. But in Zen, we don't really pay attention to those 52 stages. The 52 stages are included in no stages. I won't go into that. But we use that, we can say 52 stages, and we can use that if we want to, but it's not something that we try to attain in 52 stages. It's like an outline of practice. He says, now which do you think is better, to pursue the relative way or to resume to the absolute? So this is always the problem, right? the relative way or the absolute way, which is correct. We talk about one mind and we talk about differentiation. So Suzuki Roshi says, the relative form and color that you see now are the conditioned attributes of the unconditioned.

[12:45]

Form and color is a kind of technical term which means phenomena. Instead of saying phenomena, they say form and color. So the relative form and color that you see now are the conditioned attributes of the unconditioned, which is the absolute, constant absolute. So absolute is something constant and unconditioned, but the conditioned things are the attributes of the unconditioned. The Absolute is the eternal unconditionality that gives rise to the conditioned relative way of practice. What you see now is the eternal unconditionality of the Absolute and the momentous conditioned relative. Actually, the positive or relative way is not different from the negative or absolute even though you follow the order of the stages in your actual practice, if each relative stage, even the first stage, is brought out in full relief against the darkness of the Absolute, and if there is no fumbling and groping in your practice under the right teacher, then your practice is already in the realm of reality."

[14:05]

So he's saying, the first stage contains everything. if you can really master the first stage, the 52 stages are all there. This is called Zazen. If you wish to understand this secret, you must study under the right teacher, not only by words but also by actual conduct, in each moment under particular circumstances." He means under each particular circumstance, every moment. So to continue with Engo's introduction, he said, if you become attached to some particular way of expressing Zen, captivated by something told in words or verse, attached to some method or instruction, scolding voice, slapping face, seizing by the collar and casting off or drawing a circle or lifting up one finger.

[15:18]

These are all stereotypes, right? You are nothing better than the parasitic weeds wrapped around dead trees." Clinging to method. So, you know, when people read Zen texts and they want to find a teacher who teaches like the kind of person they read about in the book, they'll never find it. So, even if a person thinks that he is living in the land of the Tathagata itself, when he is possessed by the idea of this land or that land, he is said to be watching the moon of his old home, which is now 10,000 miles away. Well, have you understood what I'm saying? If not, here is an actual koan for you to ponder. When Seppo was in his hermitage on Mount Seppo, two monks, two unnamed monks, visited him and bowed to him.

[16:32]

And Suzuki Roshi says, what is the bow? That's a good question, right off. What is the bow? What does that mean? They bowed to him. Seppo saw them coming, pushed open his gate, jumped out and said, What is it? And the monk said, what is it? He said, what is it? And they said, what is it? And Sukhiro says, an indicative question. A question and yet an answer. Do you understand the real seppo? Tell me, what is it? An indicative question means it's not a question.

[17:33]

It's a question, but it's not a question. It's a statement. So this is the koan. This is one half of the koan. There are two koans here, but they're one koan with two sides. There's Seppo's koan and there's Kanto's koan, but we haven't gotten to Kanto's koan yet. So, do you understand the real Seppo? Tell me what it is. And Nengo says, the commentator, he is an iron flute with no holes. Seppo, referring to Seppo, he is an iron flute with no holes. Well, how do you play an iron flute with no holes? That's another koan. The two monks said, what is it? The two monks did not fail to respond, but Engo says, they are old sounding boards covered by velvet.

[18:34]

In other words, they are chalk and not cheese. Do you understand that? The chalk looks like cheese. But if you bite into it, it's not cheese. Seppo made a bow to them and went back to his room. Engo said, this is not a dragon because it has no legs, but it is certainly not a snake because it has no horns. I say, what is it? So this question persists. The two monks later extended their travels to visit Ganto on Ganto Mountain. Ganto said, where did you come from? Suzuki Roshi says, Ganto has already caught them. Where did you come from? The monk said, we are from Rignan.

[19:37]

Be quick and give them the right answer. The monks didn't get it. They were not responding. to the real question. They were answering what they thought was a dualistic question in a dualistic way. So this is the problem with the monks. This is a kind of drama. Whether or not this story is true, it's based on something, but it's a story. And it's a little drama, and the monks are the pawns in the drama. And Seppo is on one side and Ganto is on the other, and they're batting the monks back and forth, asking dumb questions, not understanding. when they're meeting these teachers, these two teachers, they're not getting how to relate to them in a non-dualistic way.

[20:46]

So that's what this story is about. And that's what all of these remarks are about. Be quick and give them the right answer. Kanta said, then you must have met Sappo, haven't you? It is very kind of him to wait for the right answer. The monk said, Yes, we have." He was not asking them yes or no, but whether they had understood the actual sepulchre. Did you really meet the actual sepulchre? Or did you just meet what you thought was sepulchre? Kanto said, what did he say? They told him all about what happened when they visited sepulchre. Kanto said, what did he say after all? thus questioning their final answer. But they said, he did not say anything. He just bowed and went back to his room.

[21:48]

Whereupon Ganto said, oh, what have I done? When I was back at Pokasan's place with him, I should have let him know the verse of my deathbed. If only I had told him that, he would not have been thrown into such confusion. Although Ganto mentioned Seppo's name, he actually meant to give the monks his own last word. What, then, is his last word? But the two monks were allowed to spend the summer at Ganto's monastery. At the end of the session, the two monks asked Ganto's instruction about the meaning of Seppo's unusual behavior and what Ganto had meant by, �How I wish I had told you my last word.� Ganto said, �Why didn't you ask me that before?�

[22:59]

And the monk said, because we thought your last word was too, something valuable? No, to ask about the different ways that this question is, we didn't want to, we felt too shy or something like that, right? So there Bhangkanta said, Seppo is a fellow countryman of mine. He and I always went on pilgrimage together, yet we will not die together. Usually it says, we were born together, but we will not die together. In other words, we learn, we travel together, we learn together, we grew up together, but we go our separate ways, and we have our separate ways of doing things. Seppo has his way, I have my way. And it's not Bhokasan's way. It's not Hungan's way.

[24:01]

It's, I have my way, he has his way. This is a mature teacher. So each teacher has their own way, but their way is the same, actually. The essence of the teacher's way is the same. but the way they express it is totally different and unique. So, Seppo was a fellow countryman of mine. He and I always went on pilgrimage together, yet we will not die together. If you want to know my last word for Seppo and you, I will tell you what it is. It is nothing but, this is it. Seppo's last word. That's Ganto's last word. This is it. Wherever Seppo and Ganto might be, however long they might live as the best friend of each other, what Seppo did is actual Seppo, and what Ganto did is actual Ganto.

[25:06]

This is it should always be the last word for oneself and for others. Dogen Zenji says, breathing in or breathing out, after all, What is it? No one can tell what it is. Now, you may not be calm or patient enough to wait for the right answer, but let us ask ourselves if our activity is either subjective or objective. Subjective means inward, objective means outward. Let me point to this. What do you mean by it? Do you mean breathing itself or the idea of breathing? If you mean the idea of breathing, it will be another matter. If you mean breathing itself, on each moment, you have solved the problem already when you breathe in and out, on each moment in calmness and big mind.

[26:11]

Now, you will understand that the right answer to what is it should always be, this is it. Kanto was killed soon after leaving his last word to his friend Seppo. And Suzuki Roshi says, this translation and commentary are my poor offering to those two great masters. So what is it? He gives us the answer. Seppo asks the question, what is it? Kanto gives the answer, this is it. This is it is, or what is it, is not just a question. It's also a statement. What is it? Or what is it? Or what is it?

[27:13]

You can, or it is what? So, what is it, is the question. It is what, is the statement. It is. What is it, is what. This. taking in very, very open to whatever is arising. Yeah, it wipes out everything so that you can be totally open. Now, the reason that I thought of this koan, or something.

[28:51]

Something like that. So, I guess I'm enlightened, right? Yeah. So the question about it, well what is it? It is not a thing. It can be anything, right, because it is not some specific thing. So the question goes to what is the ultimate thing, which is called it. It's what. Yeah. What ... Dogen uses what a lot to ... not as a question but as a statement. The what, the who, because as soon as you classify it in some way, as soon as you materialize it as something, then it's not it, right?

[29:58]

So we use these terms that are questions as statements in order to express non-duality. So the reason I like this koan The way I saw it suddenly was the questioning is like the doubt, what's called in Zen, great doubt. You raise this great doubt, which is the great question, you're always questioning, what is it? So this is a koan used in the Korean, Koreans apparently use this mostly. as a general koan for people, what is it? And I often give that to people as a koan. And then Ganto's statement is, this is it.

[31:00]

So this is it is the complement to what is it. So what is it is the great doubt. And this is it is the great faith. And so within the doubt is faith, and within the faith is doubt. So this is like what the oneness of doubt and faith. That's what occurred to me, but I've always loved this koan. It's one of my favorite koans, but I never thought of it that way before. No eyes, no ears, no nose, no mouth. So that is it? That is. That is it? That is it. That is it? This is it? All the things that you use are it or are it? Yes.

[32:01]

Do you experience it? You know, reality is it. This is it. You can ... There are two things, you know, neti neti means not this, not this, right? But not this, not this is this, this, just [...] this. Each moment is a moment of just this, is, it. But if you try to catch it as it, it's elusive. So, that's why, you know, are you talking about breathing or are you talking about the idea of breathing? Right? So, if it's just breathing, that's all it, that's it. But if it's the idea of breathing, it's, what is that? Well, I keep thinking of the San Francisco ice cream bar people, you know, it's it.

[33:07]

It's it, yeah. That's why I used to eat them, but I don't like them. This is way over my head, but I'm thinking there's only one it, there's only one this, there's only one what. Yes, every it is unique and at the same time every it is totally everything. And yet at the same time, each individual phenomenon is itself. So why do they have to be so mysterious about singing it? Singing it? About saying it. Well, because... Why are they doing all this? Because if you only think about it in the usual way, it's all dualistic. That's why You're finessing the language so that you're not falling into duality like the monks.

[34:09]

The question sounds right, but the attitude is dualistic, so they're looking for something, they're not getting the non-dualistic. You mentioned the word phenomena and I noticed in the Buddhist dictionary that the Japanese character for phenomena is the same character for dharma. So, dharma is phenomena and dharma is just this? Phenomena, dharma is about phenomena with a small d. Dharma with a capital D is about essence. So Dharma with a small d is... Dharma is both phenomenal and essential.

[35:18]

But it's the Dharma about the Dharmans. It's the essence of phenomena. So you can separate them to talk about them, but they're not separate. That's the whole thing, you know. Is it one or is it two? So the answer is, not one and not two. Instead of saying, well it's one and it's two, it always has to be stated in the negative, because otherwise you create something when you put it into the positive, you create an idea or something to hold on to. But when you say, not one, not two, the statement doesn't give you something to hold on to. Not one, not two.

[36:33]

Yes, we do. I mean, I do. Karma is a volitional act. Karma means volitional act. And then, the volitional act has a defect. willful act. You can say willful act. Volition means purposeful. And then there's the result of that act, which is called its fruit, fruition. And then so each moment's volitional act has a is a cause for the next act, which is a cause for the next act, and so forth. Breathing is not karma. It doesn't create karma.

[37:35]

Karma is a volitional act. Breathing is a non-volitional act. It's a, what do you call it? Autonomic. Autonomic, yeah. But the in-breath, brings up the condition for the out-breath, which brings up the condition for the in-breath, but there's cause and effect but it's not necessarily karma. So you have to remember that just because every cause has an effect which has a cause that has an effect, is cause and effect but it's not karma. Karma is about people and our volition and what happens to us. Is there somebody who is the subject of the volitional act? Yes. The actor.

[38:38]

But that somebody is not, you know, that somebody is a self, but that self is not a substantial self. So the karmic of the cause and effect of that volitional act keeps creating what we feel is a self, what we experience as a self. We'll all go at once. his volitional self is doing this thing. I just was thinking of the way the little icon on my computer screen goes poof when I mute it off. Computers, they really tell us a lot about ourselves. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, it's like, it all disappears. The thing is basically creating itself. The thing is creating itself, right, and then when it stops doing that, this is called the wheel of conditioned arising, because of this, dependent on this, this arises, dependent on that, that arises, dependent on that, that arises, and then it's called

[39:55]

If you want to unravel it, don't do this, and that won't happen. Don't do this, and that won't happen. Don't do this, and that won't happen. Until you get to, don't do anything, you know, or something will happen. What is it? That's conditioned arising and karma. the karma of conditioned arrival. How do you get a handle on that acting and that volition, you know, that also just is actually going to get confused. Yeah, well, yes, it's confusing. That's why it's called, the relative realm is called the realm of confusion. We don't understand ignorance. We don't understand how we create our own suffering through volitional actions which create karma.

[41:03]

There's good karma and bad karma, but nevertheless, because of this, that happens. And the cause is the way we respond to things. So we have to be careful how we respond to phenomena. Way there in the back. Way there in the back. Oh yeah, okay. Yeah, it's your turn. You can ask, what is that? And you can ask, what is it? And you can say, what is that? And you can say, what is it? What's the relationship between that and it? Well, it is that, and that is it.

[42:04]

And it is it, and that is that. And it is not this and that. And this and that is not it. As a matter of fact, I have a wonderful poem which I'll bring about it. Thanks for reminding me of that. When you investigate what is it as an investigation, the end of investigation is the ultimate reality. You can't help but come to the ultimate reality, because you eliminate everything except that, and then you realize that everything

[43:11]

is an aspect of the ultimate reality, which is, oh, this is it. Richard Broughton, Richard Broughton was a poet in the 40s, 50s. and he made movies of naked people, you know, he just had people take off their clothes, you know, and he said, oh, this is what people look like without their clothes on, you know, nothing sexy or anything, it's just like, you know, dumpy and whatever, you know, just all their stuff, all their, you know, moles and everything. And he made some great movies, great movies. And he wrote this poem called This is it. I'm bringing it.

[44:15]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ