Case number 10 of the Mu Man Kam is Seizei is solitary and destitute. Seizei's Chinese name is Ching Shui, but I use the Japanese pronunciations. The case is a monk said to Sozang, Master Sozon, I am Seizei. I'm solitary or poor, solitary and destitute. Please give me alms. Sozon said, Venerable Seizei. Seizei said, Yes, sir. Sozon said, You have already drunk three cups of the finest wine in China, and still you say that you have not moistened your lips."

[01:04]

And Lu Man, in his commentary, says, Seizei is submissive in manner, but what is his real intention? Sozan has the eye and thoroughly discerns what Seizei means. Tell me, where and how has Seizei drunk wine? And then Wu Man has a verse and he says, with the poverty of Fan Tan and the spirit of Xiang Yu, though he can hardly sustain himself, he dares to compete with the other for wealth. When I was Back in the 50s, the early 50s, when I was a beatnik in North Beach, there used to be this man, he was about 70, he was quite large, and he was a hobo.

[02:09]

And he had a long pointed beard, white, long white pointed beard, which is very unusual. That was actually before people were wearing beards. It was very unusual at that time to wear a beard. Beards didn't come in until the late 50s or early 60s. And his name was Heinz, Mr. Heinz. And he said, he used to always say, my name is Heinz, but I'm not one of the 57 varieties. And he said that at one time when he was a boy, that he and his father drove sheep from Montana to San Luis Obispo. So he knew how to get along in the world.

[03:18]

His whole life had been living from hand to mouth, actually, but it was a way of life. And he used to live, he said, what he called living under the bridge. His way of life was what he called living under the bridge. And he knew all the hobos, and every hobo had a place where they kept their things under the bridge. But under the bridge could be anywhere. He was a very generous person. He was not a person in want. He never wanted anything. He never asked anybody for anything. He always had this abundance that he was giving to everybody. The first person I knew that would go to the supermarkets and get all the old fruit, the fruit that the supermarkets were getting rid of.

[04:27]

And he would collect it all and hand it out to everybody. Of course, not everybody wanted it. But to him, everything was fine. As long as it was still there, it was good. So Mr. Hines had a great practice And he was a kind of spiritual mentor in North Beach, although it was very unofficial. And he was always happy. I mean, you know, never sad or depressed. And he used to say, well, if you don't want to eat it now, you can keep it in the reefer. I didn't know what a reefer was.

[05:30]

It used to be a marijuana cigarette. But he meant the refrigerator. He never had a refrigerator in his life. But he knew that people had them. So he said, you have a reefer, don't you? You can keep it in your reefer. So he was always one of my mentors. I felt great affinity with him, actually. I don't know what ever happened to him. Everybody moved along. But I appreciated him very much. So he was someone who was a hobo. And in Buddhism, hobo means dharma, dharma mendicant.

[06:32]

Ho is dharma. And bo is like a mendicant, a Buddha, a bodhisattva. someone who is entirely free. So there are two kinds of hobos, or you could say there are various types of hobos. Some hobos who are poor because they can't gain any wealth. And other kind of hobo is someone for whom wandering is a way of life, or being completely free is a way of life. So poverty has various aspects. Here, Seizei is a monk, good monk.

[07:42]

If you're a monk, you know that poverty is your way of life. So, when Seizei comes to Master Sozon with his question, is he bragging or complaining? He says, this poor monk, me, is solitary, poor, and destitute. Can you give me something? So he's kind of testing out Sozon. Sozon was actually quite a well-known teacher. Sozon was a dormant disciple of Tozon. And we get the name of the school, Soto, from Sozon and Tozon. The So from Sozon and the To from Tozon.

[08:47]

And even though Tozon is the teacher and Sozon is the student, So-to sounds better than To-so. So, something's going on here. A monk like Seizei says, I'm poor, solitary, and destitute. Please give me something. Can you give me something? And so Master Sozon says, Seizei. Seizei says, yes, sir, or something like that. And Sozon says, you've already drunk three of the best cups of wine in China.

[09:50]

What are you complaining about? So this is the koan. Right here, So Seizei says, I'm solitary and destitute. So my question is, is he bragging or complaining? For someone, it could be a complaint. And for someone else, it could be great freedom. So is it, where is he? What is poverty? What is having something and what is not having something?

[10:58]

Thich Nhat Hanh, when he gave his talk in Berkeley, gave an example of poverty. A little story from the polycanon. where this cow herd was looking for, he had 12 cows, and he was looking for, his cows had all run away, and he was looking for his cows, and he came upon these monks, and he said, he was crying, he was at his wits end, he said, I've lost my 12 cows, they've all run away, have you seen my cows? And he was completely miserable. And the head monk said, I'm sorry, we haven't seen your cows. And if we see them, I will send them to you or whatever.

[12:04]

Then the man was, the cowherd said, okay, thank you very much. And he went away crying and lamenting. And the head monk turned to the rest and he said, when the man had left, he said, Well, brothers, isn't it lucky that we don't have any cows? So, Seizei is presenting the side of having nothing. He's coming from the side of having nothing. And so he's testing out Sozon. He's saying, what do you think of that, Master Sozon? Is this good or is this bad? Tell me, what's your take on this? Sozon says, you have already drunk the wine.

[13:12]

Now what will you do? That's the implication. The implication is now that you've drunk the wine of poverty, of complete letting go, now what will you do? Let's take another look at the cow herd. It's fine that the monks have this freedom, but then where are they going to get their milk? Somebody has to take care of the cows so the monks can have their milk. That is, if they drink milk. So one side is to have complete freedom from everything. To really have spiritual poverty. And the other side is, how do we take care of each other?

[14:18]

How does everybody get taken care of? How do we make things work in the world? For a monk, a monk's work is to practice for the sake of all beings. This is a monk's work. Monks actually have nothing to do. It looks like. When you are ordained as a monk, you're ordained into the order of people who have nothing to do. And you depend on people to feed you. But nothing is free. Nothing comes free. Even if you get something free, you pay for it in some way. So everything is paid for. When you receive something, you pay for it in some way, even though we don't realize how we pay for something.

[15:30]

So maybe this is the difference between one kind of hobo and another. A person who is very needy may feel destitute. Someone else who has nothing may feel completely liberated and generous. When Sozan calls Seizei's name, Seizei, Seizei says, yes, yes, sir. This calling and answering is very profound. As a matter of fact, this is the koan. This is the deep part of the koan is when Sozon says, Seizei.

[16:43]

Seizei says, yes, sir. There's a koan in this Muang Khan where a teacher, the national teacher, has a student. And the national teacher is testing his student. He says, calls him by his name, Eshu. I think his name is Eshu. And Eshu says, Yes, master. And then the teacher doesn't reply. And then again, the teacher says, Eishu. Eishu says, yes, master. Third time. Teacher says, Eishu.

[17:44]

Eishu says, yes, master. And then the teacher says, Ishu, I thought it was I that was discourteous to you, but I see it's you that's discourteous to me. This word discourteous, or there are various terms, the way it's translated, doesn't mean what it says. You know, in Zen language, you can take any word and use it any way you want to. This is the freedom we have, is to take any word and use it any way we want to. Usual language, in usual language, a word has a specific meaning.

[18:52]

And it also has an opposite meaning. There are synonyms and antonyms. But in Zen language, the word contains its opposite, or transcends the opposition. So you can take a word, any word, and use it to mean whatever you want it to mean. It's great freedom. Koan Mu means no. Wu in Chinese means no. Does a dog have Buddha nature? Mu, no. But don't be caught by the literal meaning of this word. Joshu uses this word, no. But it doesn't mean just no. Because the word also contains its opposite.

[19:54]

A monk asked Joshu, again, does the dog have Buddha nature? Joshu said, yes. And he said, I thought you told that monk, no. So you have transgressed me. I thought that I had transgressed you, but it's you that's transgressed me or was impolite to me. This is his words of praise and acceptance. There was another story of a monk, a teacher. Every day the teacher called his student. And when the teacher would come, did you call master? You called master. And then the teacher would say, what is it?

[21:01]

So every day the teacher would call the student in. And when the student came, the teacher would say, what is it? This went on for 18 years. Finally, when the student understood, the teacher stopped calling him. If you go to a restaurant and ask the waiter, call the waiter over and act like that, you probably get thrown out. But this is a different kind of relationship. This is not playing with the mind or dallying in abstractions.

[22:09]

This is getting down to the essence, where there's nothing in between the question and the response. So, Seizei is coming from the side of emptiness. Sozon is responding from the side of form. Seizei says, I have nothing. Sozon says, you have everything. Perfectly matching. Question and response. Perfectly matching.

[23:12]

I have nothing. And in the Seizei, that's where it's the vitality issues. Kind of like when a mother, a child, a small child checks in, you know, with mom and says, Yes. Doesn't want anything. Mom? Yes. Mom? Yes. What do you want? Mom finally breaks down. But the child just wants the response. Just wants to know that mom is there.

[24:17]

It doesn't want to particularly have a conversation. It's just pure calling and pure responding. Having everything and having nothing, what's the difference? So, in Mumban's comment, he says, Qingshui is submissive in manner, or Seizei is submissive in manner. In other words, his manner is very condescending. But what is his real intention? Sozan has the eye and thoroughly discerns what Seizei means. Tell me, where and how has Seizei drunk wine?

[25:20]

And in Mun Man's verse, he says, with the poverty of Fan Tang and the spirit of Xiang Yu, though he can hardly sustain himself, he dares to compete with the other for wealth. These two examples, Fan Tang and Xiang Yu, in ancient China, Fan Tang was a government official who quit his job as an official. because he just couldn't stand working in those conditions. And he got a cart, put his family in the cart, which he pushed around, and became a fortune teller. I don't know if that's any better, but... Anyway, he became a fortune teller. He didn't make very much money as a fortune teller, and he was very poor and destitute. But he was very free and happy.

[26:25]

And he didn't have much to live on, and he scrounged around for his family. But he had great spirit, and there were no complaints in his life. So he's always held up as an example of someone in that condition. What about his family? I don't know about his family. It doesn't say. But Xiang Yu was a general, very famous general. And he came to a certain point in his life where the other army was stronger than his. And so the story is about, he's in his tent. and he has his beautiful mistress and he's worried about what's going to happen to his mistress and he knows that he's going to die and he's just having a happy time.

[27:36]

So it's a kind of example of letting go of the burden of worry This is used as an example of letting go of the burden of worry. He's a little worried about his mistress, though, because he loves her very much. He's wondering what's going to happen to her. There's a kind of verse, I think, about him, the famous poem about him. Strength to drive through a mountain. Spirit to cover the whole earth. But the time is unfavorable. Qiu Yi doesn't want to go forth. You is his mistress. He says, you, oh, you, what will be your fate? So the rest of the verse says, though he can hardly sustain himself, this is Cece.

[28:48]

Though Cece can hardly sustain himself, he dares to compete with the other for wealth. dares to compete with Sozon for wealth. So here, you know, it also means the poem usually praises somebody, but it sounds like they're putting him down. So Seizei has transcended poverty and wealth. Poverty and wealth are no longer a problem. If Seizei suddenly has a million dollars, he's still Seizei. If Seizei has nothing, he's still Seizei. So we sometimes think that in order to have poverty, we should give away everything that we own.

[29:53]

That is one way of having poverty. That's the way of the monk. But how do we exercise the spirit of poverty even though we have something? Actually, in this world, it's very difficult to not have something. In other parts of the world it's easy, but in this part of the world, just in nirvana of California, it's pretty hard to not have something. Just with a little effort, you know, we can have a lot, and we can get hooked on a lot. So how do we maintain freedom from both spiritually and materially.

[30:56]

We tend to think of poverty in terms of material things. And we tend to think of wealth in terms of material things. But there's also wealth and poverty on the spiritual side. And there's also a kind of materialism of spirituality. Sawaki Kodo, the Hiroshi, What is to say? Zazen is good for nothing. It's really good for nothing.

[32:02]

But this good for nothing is better than anything else that you can find. So often we go to spirituality to get something. Fix us up. That doesn't help. Do you have any questions? I think when Susan asked the question, what about this family, I was not sure what she meant. What did you mean, Susan?

[33:04]

What do you think I mean? I don't know. Well, it seems to me that he might be very happy with that choice. You know, so many of these stories are told from a male perspective. And there's his wife and his children. And I think we probably assume that because he was happy that his family was happy. But, you know, to haul your family around in a cart is a pretty big choice for the entire family. Well, maybe the family was happy. Maybe. We don't know. That's right. So we can speculate. Do you want to speculate? Do I want to speculate? Well, you know, the times are quite different from now. If it's in Berkeley, I would imagine somebody with two large shopping carts. And here in California, in Urbano, California, there are so many rules and regulations.

[34:12]

I think that it would probably have been easier in ancient China On the other hand, I think there's a kind of assumption that everybody's lot is better, because it was easier then. I kind of doubt that. His family was happy. How do you know? They sent me a letter. Yes? I think, uh, what's missing, uh, What I'm trying to say is that I think everyone has responsibility. That's why a priest doesn't get married in that kind of Buddhism. That's right. Because when you get married, you have responsibility and duty and role in that system. And so, when you talk about the mistress... About what? One of the masters, his mistress, that he is... concerned about her future if he dies, but he let go of the worry.

[35:18]

I think that he has the duty and responsibility for her also. And if he has prepared that for her and let go of the worry, I think that is not attachment. But if he has not, the only thing for her, because man and woman I think that can be selfish. So it depends on the details of the story. It's interesting how you pick up on these details. Supposing they're on the top of a mountain, and the army has surged up to the top of the mountain in this big cliff going down the mountain, right? So how is he going to prepare for her future? No, it's not. This is it.

[36:20]

This is what happened. That's right. Women have to be careful who they take up with. That's a good point. I don't think that if it's mutual, you know, the man and the woman mutually understand the world and the expectation of each other, I think that is a perfect life to live. But if one, if it is not compatible, then I think it's a problem there. So here we have two sub-stories. One is the story of What happened, you know, did the family in the cart like it or didn't they like it? And is he subjecting his family to this?

[37:23]

In the olden days, in those days, women were pretty, the family was the property of the man. This is just the way it was. Pretty much the women, not women, but the family was the property of the men. And the man was responsible for them, if it was a family. And what the man decided to do, pretty much is what everybody did. It's just the way it was. Still is. Yeah, still is. But... Now we can argue about it. Yeah, now we can argue about it. But anyway, I know for sure that the family in the cart was very happy. The reason I know is because the man was happy. He wouldn't have been happy if his family wasn't happy. If he's a real man.

[38:25]

I think it's kind of interesting how we interpret Well, that's a good point.

[39:28]

You read Thich Nhat Hanh's little talk about his take on the war. We're very unhappy people. Happy people don't make war on other people. We may have great materialistic, great material things, but we're very unhappy people. And we're unhappy because, for various reasons. But for one thing, we have to keep pumping up our material foundation in order to keep up our sense of well-being. And we do it at the expense of everybody else. And we train ourselves to be warriors and kill people in order to keep that going.

[40:34]

I'm not very happy. Still, I would imagine that a parent in this culture, I'm not one, but I would imagine that a parent in this culture, even if they were very much in equilibrium and happy, if they didn't have many material If they didn't have material abundance, that when their child went to school in this culture and they came up around these other kids who had a lot, I think that the child might experience something, even if their parent's happy. That's right. But, if parents are not so busy, they have more time to spend with their children, and it's a happier situation. And as a matter of fact, not too long ago, it was only the men that worked. Now it's the men and the women who work.

[41:37]

And children do not spend very much time with their parents, and they're very unhappy. And so we keep creating these things to make them happy. Toys are us. It's huge. buildings full of things that we think will make our children happy. When really they just want to be together with their family. You don't need so much. When the children go to school and they see all these kids having so much and they don't have something, they are very unhappy. But if everybody didn't have so much, then they'd be more happy sharing what they have.

[42:38]

So the kids who have so much are not always so happy. What? The kids who have so much are not so happy. Well, that's right. They're not so happy because they think they're supposed to have more. That's the greatest cause of unhappiness, is that you can't see what you've got, and you think that you have to have more. You think you have to have something that you don't have. This is real poverty. Real poverty. No? Yeah. Do you think it's possible also, I mean, you're talking about grief there, about wealth and accumulation, possession, desire that never gets fulfilled. But it's also possible to be greedy about poverty. So there's a difference between the non-action of zazen and the non-action of idleness or a resistance to work and just do what you need to do. So sometimes that comes up for me when I hear stories that somewhat idealize a beggar or a mendicant

[43:45]

and the resistance to just engage in activity that's the same as non-action. So that way, work could interfere with formal practice, that's true, but not necessarily. So that if a monk does formal practice and yet has all this time available, free, Well, that's true. When I was talking about, you know, I said a monk has to pay back, right? So a monk has, even though, to say that a monk has nothing to do, a priest has nothing, that's just a kind of joke, right? Nothing to do means your whole life is dedicated to doing something, but not for yourself.

[44:52]

And that's how a monk pays back being fed by people. That's their payment. So that's why I said nothing's free, right? So a person saying a monk has nothing to do means because they don't have the usual obligations they have another obligation. And the other obligation that most people don't feel is the obligation to work for the benefit of everyone, not just selfish. To have nothing to do sounds very selfish. It means you're free to do anything you have to do. You're not tied down to some through other obligations, so that you can actually offer yourself to everyone.

[46:01]

So this kind of poverty is actually great freedom. And if a monk doesn't do that, then they're not fulfilling their obligation. So this freedom is not just freedom to do what you want, It's freedom to be able to help everyone in an unrestricted way. So each one of us has that ability to some extent. Sometimes I think that it might be easier to be a monk. I think that living in this culture is very complicated. Even though they don't, you know, have to, a monk doesn't have to lead the kind of life where they go out and get a career and have families and this and that.

[47:16]

I think that their stuff is, it's very direct what is in front of them. And I think in this culture, having to make so many choices Well, what's easy on one side is hard on another, for everyone, no matter where they are, no matter what they're doing. Everything has two sides. So, easy and difficult. Everything. Everything looks so good on either side. So, if you decide to do something, you should always look at the other side. Because we always decide to do something on the basis of what's good about it. You know, something is very attractive and so we're attracted to it. But it also has another side. So you should also look at the other side and say, am I willing to accept that along with this? Otherwise, you get stuck, trapped. How did I decide to do this? Like getting married.

[48:20]

You see a bright face, but the other side is dark. So we have to be willing to accept the whole package, and we should be well informed. That's why if you become ordained as a priest, it takes a long time to think about it. There's some paradox in the idea of being poor, being a monk, and also accumulation. I know that when I was a younger man I was much greedier because I didn't have money and I had a need to have money and power. And as I accumulated money, and I was less ethical also,

[49:24]

The need fell away and I became more ethical because I didn't have to cut the corners to get it. So, I don't know where I would have been if I had taken a vow of poverty. I guess I wasn't inclined to do that because I... That's something for some people to do. It's not a matter of whether we have something or don't have something. The point is, how free are we from what we have? Is materialism running our life? Who's running our life? That's the point. Does that hinder us from helping others? It's a matter of how free are we?

[50:36]

I think that's right, because a lot of people when they accumulate it just breeds more greed. Yeah, that's right. One thing breeds... But it's more like in the realm of birth and death, what do we actually have? Actually, we don't have anything. And if we know that we don't have anything, then we can use everything quite freely. But if we think that we don't have something, then we're caught by the need to have it. This is our problem. So it's not so much a matter of what we have or what we don't have.

[51:42]

Even if we have everything, material, we're still unsatisfied. So, this is not a matter of, you should give up all of your possessions. That's not what this is about. It's about where is your true home, and where is your freedom, and what do you really depend on? What do we really depend on? And the less we depend on, the freer we are. Thank you.

[52:52]

Me too. It's hard for all of us. Thank you.

[52:59]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ