The Cypress Tree
Hakujushi

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES

1.  The version of Zhaozhou’s life that Dōgen gives here is slightly different from the one appearing in his Shōbōgenzō gyōji 正法眼藏行持(上), composed a few months after our text:

趙州觀音院眞際大師從諗和尚、とし六十一歳なりしに、はじめて發心求道をこころざす。瓶錫をたづさへて行脚し、遍歴諸方するに、つねにみづからいはく、七歳童兒、若勝我者、我即問伊、百歳老翁、不及我者、我即教佗。かくのごとくして南泉の道を學得する功夫、すなはち二十年なり。年至八十のとき、はじめて趙州城東觀音院に住して、人天を化導すること、四十來年なり。

The Venerable Preceptor Cong, the Great Master Zhenji of Gyuanyin cloister in Zhaozhou, at the age of sixty-one first aspired to “produce the thought” and seek the way.  Grasping his [water] bottle and staff, he traveled on foot and widely traversed various quarters, always saying to himself, “A seven-year-old child who surpasses me, I’ll inquire of him; a hundred-year-old elder who doesn’t reach me, I’ll teach him.”  In this way, he spent twenty years in the concentrated effort to study the way of Nanquan.  Only when he reached the age of eighty did he reside at Gyanyin cloister, in Chengdong, in Zhaozhou, where he guided humans and gods for forty years.  (DZZ.1:153.)

          Despite their slightly different chronologies, both these accounts seem to suggest that Zhaozhou was already in his sixties when he became a monk and undertook the pilgrimage that led him to Nanquan.  Since the latter died in 834, when Zhoazhou would have been only fifty-six, clearly there is some confusion here.  In fact, traditional biographies suggest that Zhaozhou met Nanquan as a young man and that his wanderings were subsequent to that meeting.  Finally, as in the Gyōji account here, at the age of eighty, he is said to have become abbot of Guanyin cloister, where he served till his death at one hundred twenty.

          The source for Dōgen’s claim that Zhaozhou “left home” at the advanced age of sixty-one is unclear.  The latter’s biography in the Jingde chuandeng lu states that, as a youth he donned the robe and shaved his head (piti 披剃) at Hutong yuan 扈通院, in present-day Shandong, but did not yet receive the precepts (wei nai jie 未納戒) (T.51:276c7-8) — this would explain Nanquan’s reference to him in our text as a śrāmaṇera, or “novice.”  His biography in the Zhaozhou lu says that he accompanied his “original master” (benshi 本師) — presumably the (unidentified) monk under whom he became a novice — to visit Nanquan; then, after he received the precepts (shou jie 受戒) — presumably from Nanquan — he returned to his home district in Caozhou 曹州 to visit “the master from whom he received the work” (shou ye shi 受業師) — again, no doubt, his “original master.”  When his family heard that he had returned and sought to visit him, he escaped in the night and set off on his travels (bianli zhufang 遍歴諸方), always saying to himself,

七歳童兒勝我者、我即問伊。百歳老翁不及我者、我即教他。

A seven-year-old child who surpasses me, I’ll inquire of him; a hundred-year-old elder who doesn’t reach me, I’ll teach him.  (Guzunsu yulu, ZZ.118:152c17-d13.)

2.  Although presented here as a Japanese rendering of a Chinese text, there seems to be no closely equivalent extant source for this passage.  In his Eihei kōroku (DZZ.3:26, number 33), Dōgen sites a somewhat abbreviated version of Zhaozhou’s remarks.

趙州云、兄弟但究理坐看。三二十年若不會道、取老僧頭去、作酌大小便杓。

Zhaozhou said, “Brothers, just investigate the principle, sit and see.  If, in twenty or thirty years, you haven’t understood the way, take off this old monk’s head and make a ladle to scoop shit and piss.”

一心不生、萬法無咎。汝但究理坐看、三二十年。若不會道、截取老僧頭去。

[As is said in the Xin xin ming 信心銘,] “When a single thought does not arise, there’s nothing wrong with the ten thousand dharmas.”  Just investigate the principle, sit and see.  If, in twenty or thirty years, you haven’t understood the way, cut off this old monk’s head.

3.  The practice of calling Zhaozhou “an old buddha” is common in Chan texts.  It is said to originate in a saying of Zhaozhou’s younger contemporary Xuefeng Yicun 雪峯義存 (822-908).  The saying is found in Xuefeng’s recorded sayings (Xuefeng yulu 雪峯語録, ZZ.119:964b16) and other texts; Dōgen records it in his shinjiShōbōgenzō (DZZ.5:268, case 283):

雪峰、因僧問、古澗寒泉時如何。師曰、瞪目不見底。僧曰、飲者如何。師曰、不從口入。後有僧挙似趙州。州曰、不可從鼻孔裏入。僧問、古澗寒却泉時如何。州曰、苦。僧曰、飲者如何。州曰、死。師聞之云、趙州古佛。師從此不答話。

    Once, a monk asked Xuefeng, “How about when it’s the cold spring of the old stream?”
    The master said, “Though you stare at it, you can’t see to the bottom.”
    [The monk] said, “How about the one who drinks from it?”
    The master said, “It won’t go in from his mouth.”
    Later, there was a monk who raised this with Zhaozhou.  Zhou said, “It can’t be that it goes in through his nostrils.”
    The monk asked again, “How about when it’s the cold spring of the old stream?”
    Zhou said, “Bitter.”
    The monk said, “How about the one who drinks from it?”
    Zhou said, “He dies.”
    The master, hearing this, said, “Zhaozhou is an old buddha.”  After this, the master did not give answers [to this question].

4. Zhaozhou’s “cypress tree at the front of the garden” is a famous dialogue found in a number of sources; see. e.g., Zongmen tongyao ji 宗門統要集 (4:13b; Zengaku tenseki sōkan 禅学典籍叢刊.1:77b); Liandeng huiyao 聯燈會要 (ZZ.136:264verso,col a); shinji Shōbōgenzō (DZZ.5:190, case 119).  Here is the version appearing in the Zhaozhou yulu (ZZ:118:307a15-b2).

師上堂謂衆曰、此事的的、沒量大人出這裏不得。老僧到潙山、僧問、如何是祖師西來意。潙山云、與我將床子來。若是宗師、須以本分事接人始得。時有僧問、如何是祖師西來意。師云、庭前栢樹子。學云、和尚莫將境示人。師云、我不將境示人。云、如何是祖師西來意。師云、庭前栢樹子。

      The master ascended the hall and addressed the assembly saying, “This matter is obvious.  The unfathomably great person cannot get out of it.
      “When this old monk went to Gueishan, a monk asked, ‘What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?’
      “Gueishan said, ‘Bring me a chair.’
      “If he’s a master of the essential meaning, he must only engage a person with the fundamental matter.”
      At that time, a monk asked, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
      The master said, “The cypress tree at the front of the garden.”
      The student said, “Reverend Preceptor, don’t use objects to show people.”
      The master said, “I don’t use use objects to show people.”
      [The student] said, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
      The master said, “The cypress tree at the front of the garden.”

            The cypress tree appears elsewhere in Zhaozhou’s recorded sayings, not only in the passage on the buddha nature that Dōgen will introduce below, but in the following exchange (ZZ.118:308b15-16):

問、如何是學人自己。師云、還見庭前栢樹子麼。

    [A monk] asked, “What is this student’s self?”
    The master said, “Do you see the cypress tree at the front of the garden?”

5.  The question of Bodhidharma’s intention in coming to China seems to have preoccupied the monks in Zhaozhou’s community; it occurs with great frequency thoughout his recorded sayings.  Some examples of Zhaozhou’s responses:

問、如何是西來意。師下禪床。學云、莫便是否。師云、老僧未有語在。

      [A monk] asked, “What is the intention of coming from the west?”
      The master got down from his meditation seat.
      The student said, “That’s it, right?”
      The master said, “The old monk hasn’t said anything yet.”  (ZZ.118:309a11-12)

問、三乘十二分教即不問，如何是祖師西來意。師云，水牯牛生兒也好看取。云，未審此意如何。師云，我亦不知。

      [A monk] asked, “I don’t ask about the three vehicles or the teachings in twelve divisions.  What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
      The master said, “The water buffalo has given birth to child; take good care of it.”
      [The monk] said, “What do you mean by that”
      The master said, “I don’t know either.”  (ZZ.118:318a12-14)

問，如何是祖師西來意。師云，床脚是。云，莫便是也無。師云，是即脱取去。

      [A monk] asked, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
      The master said, “The chair leg is it.”
      [The monk] said, “That’s it, right?”
      The master said, “If that’s it, pull it out.”  (ZZ.118:319b12-13)

問，如何是祖師西來意。師云，欄中失却牛。

      [A monk] asked, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
      The master said, “We’ve lost the cow from the pen.” (ZZ.118:321b11-12.)

問，如何是西來意。師云，因什麼向院裏罵老僧。云，學人有何過。師云，僧不能就院裏罵得闍黎。

      [A monk] asked, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
      The master said, “Why do you come in the cloister and abuse this old monk?”
      [The monk] said, “What did this student do wrong?”
      The master said, “This old monk can’t abuse the ācārya in the cloister.”  (ZZ.118:231b16-18.)

問，如何是西來意。師云，什麼處得者消息來。

      [A monk] asked, “What is the intention of coming from the west?”
      The master said, “Where did you get that news?”  (ZZ.118:233b2-3.)

6.  According to the Shōbōgenzō monge, the influential commentary attributed to the Sōtō master Menzan Dōhaku 面山道白(1636-1715), the key to this difficult passage is the understanding that the “the intention of the ancestral master” lies precisely in the abandonment of both the “object” (of experience) and the “person” (who experiences).  Hence, Dōgen says that the point to be understood is that “the cypress tree” is neither an “object” nor “the self.”  To say that the “Venerable Preceptor” is not “impeded” is to say that there is no “person” or “object” apart from him; there is only the “Venerable Preceptor” as “I.”  Similarly, to say that, even when “impeded,” the “I” is “a person” is to say that, in the absence of a distinction between “person” and “object,” the person is not separate from this self.  (CKZS.5:225ff)

     Based on this general approach to the passage (though with some departures), one possible paraphrase of the argument here might be as follows (with interpolations in square brackets).

This kōan is a teaching of Zhaozhou, but Zhaozhou here is speaking as a fully enlightened buddha.  [Hence the dialogue is in part about] “who is in charge” here [— what is Zhaozhou’s true self].  The key theme of this dialogue is [the relation between the objects of experience and the experiencing subject, expressed here respectively as “object” and “person”:] that the cypress tree is not an object of experience, [because it is identified with Bodhidharma’s intention, and] Bodhidharma’s intention is not an object; [still,] the cypress tree is [also] not [reduceable to] the self [simply as the subject of experience].  This [problematizing of the dichotomy between subject and object] is the point both of the monk’s asking Zhaozhou not to “show a person with an object” and of Zhaozhou’s claim that he does not do so.  The Venerable Preceptor [Zhaozhou’s true self] is not defined by his identification either as “venerable preceptor” or as “I”; it is only when he is so defined that he is “a person” [in contrast to the “object”].  [Similarly,] the “object” is [not to be understood merely as the object of our experience; it is also] defined by Bodhidharma’s intention, [is also the cypress tree that Zhaozhou says] is that intention.  This does not mean that Bodhidharma’s intention is contingent on our world of sense objects; indeed, it is not to be understood even as the essence of enlightenment [said to be brought by Bodhidharma to China].  Rather [in the words of Zhaozhou’s teacher, Nanquan], it is not “the buddha” [enlightenment], not “the mind” [the subject], not “a thing” [the object].

7.  “Who is the one in charge?” (tare ka kore shujinkō nari たれかこれ主人公なり):  The Chinese term zhurengong 主人公, translated rather casually here as “the one in charge” is a colloquial expression for the “proprietor,” the “head,” the “host,” the “subject,” etc.;  commonly used in Chan texts for the true self.  Here, the question would seem to be asking about the true creater of “this one public case,” or, more broadly, the true nature of Zhaozhou.  This is the only occurrence of the term in theShōbōgenzō; its use here may reflect Nanquan’s question, above, “Are you a śrāmaṇera with a master” (shu 主), as well as, more importantly, dialogues found in Zhaozhou’s recorded sayings, in which he is himself asked about “who is in charge” of him.  See, e.g., Zhaozhou yulu, ZZ.118:308b5:  “Someone asked, ‘Who is in charge of Zhaozhou?’ (ruhe shi zhaozhou zhurengong 如何是趙州主人公).  The master answered, 'A field hand’ (tianshe nu 田厙奴).”

8.  Dōgen’s rather curious introduction here of the “old ancestral shrine” and his association of the “object” with “burying” may reflect two passages occurring in Zhaozhou’s recorded sayings.

問、佛祖在日、佛祖相傳。佛祖滅後、什麼人傳。師云、古今總是老僧分上。學云、未審傳箇什麼。師云、箇箇總屬生死。云、不可埋沒却祖師也。師云、傳箇什麼。

      [A monk] asked, “When the buddhas and ancestors were alive, the buddhas and ancestors transmitted [the dharma].  After the extinction of the buddhas and ancestors, who transmits?”
      The master said, “All of past and present is this old monk’s lot.”
      The student said, “So what do you transmit?”
      The master said, “Everyone is included in birth and death.”
      [The student] said, “You shouldn’t bury the ancestral masters.”
      The master said, “So what do they transmit?” (ZZ.118:315B12-15.)

師有時屈指云，老僧喚作拳，儞諸人喚作什麼。僧云，和尚何得將境示人。師云，我不將境示人。若將境示闍黎，即埋沒闍黎去也。云，爭奈者箇何。師便珍重。

    The master once clenched his fingers and said, “This old monk calls it a fist.  What do you all call it?” 
    A monk said, “Reverend Preceptor, how can you use an object to teach people?”
    The master said, “I don’t use an object to teach people.  If I used an object to teach you ācārya, it would bury you ācārya.
    [The monk] said, “Then what about that?”
    The master bid them farewell [and left].  (ZZ.118:323a2-5.)

     If these passages are influencing Dōgen’s remarks here, his point might be, at least in part, that Zhaozhou’s cypress tree is not a memorial to the Chan ancestor Bodhidharma but what he is using to “bury” (i.e., teach) people.

9.  The phrase “I'm also like this” is derived from the words of the Sixth Ancestor, Huineng, in the following conversation often quoted by Dōgen (from the version given in Dōgen's shinji Shōbōgenzō [DZZ.5:178, case 101]).

南嶽山大慧禪師〈嗣曹渓、諱懷讓〉參六祖。祖曰、從什麼處來。師曰、嵩山安國師處來。祖曰、是什麼物恁麼來。師罔措。於是執侍八年、方省前話。乃告祖云、懷讓會得、當初來時、和尚接某甲、是什麼物恁麼來。祖云、爾作麼生會。師曰、説似一物即不中。祖曰、還假修證否。師曰、修證即不無、染汚即不得。祖曰、祗此不染汚、是諸佛之所護念。汝亦如是、吾亦如是、乃至西天諸祖亦如是。

      The Chan Master Dahui of Mt. Nanyue (descendant of Caoxi, named Huairang) visited the Sixth Ancestor.  The Ancestor asked him, “Where do you come from?”
      The Master said, “I come from the National Teacher An on Mt. Song.”
      The Ancestor said, “What is it that comes like this?”
      The Master was without means [to answer].  After attending [the Ancestor] for eight years, he finally understood the previous conversation.  Thereupon, he announced to the Ancestor, “I've understood what you put to me when I first came:  'What is it that comes like this?’'”
      The Ancestor asked, “How do you understand it?”
      The Master replied, “To say it's like anything wouldn't hit it.”
      The Ancestor said, “Then is it contingent on practice and verification?”
      The Master answered, “Practice and verification are not nonexistent; they cannot be defiled.”
      The Ancestor said, “Just this 'not defiled' is what the buddhas bear in mind.  You're also like this, I'm also like this, and all the ancestors of the Western Heavens [i. e., India] are also like this.”

10.  The notion of a piece of ground not reached by yin and yang alludes to a story, appearing in the Zongmen liandeng huiyao (ZZ.136:332.recto.a) and other Chan texts.  A group of seven princesses visits a charnal field and, seeing the corpses there, gain understanding of the Buddhist teachings.  The king of the gods, Śakra, then offers them a boon:

女曰、我家四事七珍悉皆具足。唯祗要三般物。第一要無根樹子一株。第二要無陰陽地一片。第三要叫不響山谷一處。帝釋曰、一切所須我悉有之、三般物者實無。欲與聖姉同去白佛。於是同往見佛、乃問斯事。佛言、憍尸迦、我諸弟子大阿羅漢、悉皆不解此義。唯有諸大菩薩、乃知斯事。

      The women said, “Our household is fully provided with the four necessities [food, clothing, furnishings, and medicines] and the seven precious substances.  We want only three things:  first, we want a tree without roots; second, we want a piece of ground without yin or yang; third, we want a valley where calls don’t echo.”
      King Śakra said, “I have everything you could require, but these three things, I do not have.  I will go together with the noble sisters to consult the Buddha.”
     Thereupon, they went together to see the Buddha and asked him about this matter.
     The Buddha said, “Kauśika [i.e., Śakra], none of my disciples, the great arhats, understand the meaning of this.  Only the great bodhisattvas know about this matter.”

Dōgen tells this story in his Eihei kōroku (DZZ.3:42-44, #64) and then comments:

師乃云、如來無上菩提義、諸大聲聞総不知。獨有過量諸菩薩、得便宜處落便宜。雖然如是、興聖代他天帝道。儞要無根樹麼、庭前柏樹子是。若也用不得、拈拄杖道、這箇便是。儞要不陰陽地麼、屍陀林是。若也用不得、盡十方世界便是。儞要喚不響谷麼、喚七賢女云、姉妹。女應諾即向伊道、與儞不響谷了也。若不應諾、向伊道、果然不響。

The meaning of the unexcelled bodhi of the tathāgatas, is completely unknown to the great śrāvakas; only the bodhisattvas beyond reckoning can “gain the advantage and lose the advantage.”  Be this as it may, I shall answer the maidens for the king of the gods.  “You want a tree without a root?  The cypress tree at the front of the garden is it.”  If they can’t use it, I hold up my staff and say, “This is it.”  “You want ground without yin or yang?  The charnal field is it.”  If they can’t use it, [I say,] “All worlds in the ten directions are it.”  “You want a valley where calls don’t echo?”  I call the seven noble ladies, saying, “sisters.”  If the women respond, I say to them, “I’ve given you the valley without an echo.”  If they don’t respond, I say to them, “It doesn’t echo after all.”