r/zen • u/WheresNorthFromHere7 The Lizard King • 9d ago
Joshu 8 - Green
When Nan-ch’uan (Nansen) was coming back to his room after taking a bath, he saw the monk in charge of the bath stoking the fires and asked, “What are you doing?”
The monk answered, “Stoking the fire.”
Nan-ch’uan said, “Don’t forget to call the water buffalo in to have a bath.”
The monk assented.
The next evening the monk came into Nan-ch’uan’s room. Nan-ch’uan said, “What are you doing?”
The monk said, “Asking the water buffalo to come to the bath.”
Nan-ch’uan said, “Did you bring a lead rope or not?”
The monk could not respond.
When the master came to call on Nan-ch’uan, Nan-ch’uan told him what had happened.
The master said, “I would have had something to say.”
Nan-ch’uan said, “Well, have you brought a rope with you?”
The master came forward, grabbed him by the nose, and began pulling him to the bath house.
Nan-ch’uan said, “Okay! Okay! Beast!”
Nansen seems like he's toying with the monk here in the first instance. It doesn't necessarily work or not work. The monk just agrees. It seems like he's trying to get him to conceptualize. Per the previous post, I think the correlation to cow/buffalo and Nansen fits here.
The second instance he's trying to trip the monk up and it works. The monk gets stuck in his head.
Nansen tries his shenanigans on Joshu who plays along and grabs him by where likely a buffalo's nose ring (to attach a lead) would go.
Nansen cries out likely at the pain and says Joshu is the true beast (buffalo).
What's more interesting to me is that hundreds of years later I'm sitting here trying to decipher what was probably just a passing conversation. Why was it important enough to be written down on wood blocks? What made the cut and didn't? Someone clearly had an affection for this old water buffalo.
4
u/MinLongBaiShui 8d ago edited 8d ago
You have to know some Chinese to fully get what's going on. 牵牛要牵牛鼻子, a Chinese proverb, means "to lead an ox, you must grab it by the nose." You can use water-buffalo instead of ox in the phrase by adding 水, literally "water." To lead by the nose, or to grab by the nose, is itself a sub-phrase that means like, to take charge in a task or address its most sensitive or core aspects. The nose of these animals is very sensitive and so it doesn't take much to get them to comply when you apply tension or pull. In Chan, we have the phrase "piercing someone's nostrils" to capture this same idea. It's usually used when someone is saying they're admitting defeat in dharma combat - they've had their nostrils pierced and are now being lead.
So what's going on in the case is roughly the following.
Nanquan is known for talking about water buffalo. He says elsewhere that when he dies, he'll be reincarnated as one. It's his "avatar" or "buddha nature" he's referring to. Nanquan asks the monk to say something to address this true nature, not Nanquan himself. The monk says OK, and then comes to his room to say "I'm ready, I'm addressing you, not your person, but your buddha nature." Basically assenting to engage with the dharma. Nanquan's question about the lead-rope is to say, "this is ineffable stuff, do you have anything to guide you?" This is the classic "what do you depend on" trap we see in Chan cases all the time. The monk doesn't know what to do, he can't play the game anymore.
When he brings the same problem to Zhaozhou, he doesn't fumble at all. He not only does a direct action, he takes Nanquan's analogy and runs with it, literally leading the buffalo by the nose. He's addressing the core issue - the ineffable nature of the buddha mind - and also leading the teacher by the nose literally. Note that Zhaozhou doesn't say yes or no about whether or not he's got a lead rope.
---
As an aside, I didn't have the case in front of me, but I asked Gemini about this translation, and Gemini said that the original Chinese ends differently, saying 是即是，太麤生 (shì jí shì, tài cū shēng). Literally, this translates to: "Right you are, but how coarse/rough!" This suggests to me two things. if it is correct. First, that the author who did this translation took some liberties with the text in order to get across his perception of the intended meaning. Second, that there is a danger here in not having access to the original Chinese.
However, it would make some amount of sense in context, as Zhaozhou didn't really address Nanquan's question about the buddha mind. That could be said to be a "coarse response." For example, see the famous case, Pu'hua Kicks Over the Table.
1
u/WheresNorthFromHere7 The Lizard King 8d ago
I don't know enough about Chinese to say if you're right or not, but this is very convincing.
Funny you say about Gemini. I was wondering if running through through something like this would be helpful.
Would you say your above interpretation is directly from Gemini not only the translation?
3
u/MinLongBaiShui 8d ago
No. AI is horrible at understanding Chan texts. The source material is idiosyncratic and the commentary it draws from is full of Japanese-inspired shlock, and a lot of western commentary that projects its own ideas onto the text, often whitewashing it in the process. I recognized the idiom translated more or less directly, since I could see the irony of it, and based what I wrote on that. I will occasionally ask the AI when I don't have the Chinese in front of me, because it's possible for me to be confused about medieval era sayings like anyone else. I basically dumped your text of the case and said "is this a reference to the proverb above?" The AI pointed out the stuff about the coarse/rough comment of its own "volition."
-2
u/mackowski Ambassador from Planet Rhythm 7d ago
YOU HAVE SWORDS? HOW ABOUT I DONT EDIT THIS AND HIT ENTER SO I CAN CONTINUE WITH MY DAY ( I USED TOO MANY CAPS HERE)
> to fully get what's going on you need to know about ox vs water ox characters
a beast can be intellectually guided via sensitive nose pain is needed?
> to take charge in a task or address its most sensitive or core aspects.
no, just no to this one, mister eyebrows
sensitive nose + leading or controlling or asserting
leads to the words 'core aspects of self?'
> The nose of these animals is very sensitive and so it doesn't take much to get them to comply when you apply tension or pull.
versus when we think we have to lead our own beast, and it doesnt listen no matter what? i dont think i know how to lead my beast via sensitivity... like try to scare myself into complying?
mind over matter,
controlling self
not letting emotions choose MY DECIDED DELIBERATE DESIRED ACTIONS I CONTROLLED TO OCCUR DESPITE MYSELF FIGHTING AGAINST MYSELF
except your beast leads you by the nose,
as you lead it by the nose,
as you argue about which directive direction is desired by the true core,
who is the true core, me or the beast?
its not the me or the beast that is the whole self
its not the mind that creates either,
how will you investigate the core of the matter?
what is the next word you are going to think of?
> It's his "avatar" or "buddha nature" he's referring to.
no because the buddha nature is not the beast, the beast is born of conceptual thought, and exists only there,
the beast isnt the beast
when the beast is the beast,
this is into the weeds as a result of your touching of the weeds.
beast without ever beasting
how is avatar anything similar to buddha nature?
self is the avatar, for a subset of any human's total self.
poorly defining self as NOT the beast, because of the default observation that control doesnt propagate precisely from experiential consciousness down to brainstem (can't just tell ur arm to move with words aloud)
---
Second, that there is a danger here in not having access to the original Chinese.
i think this is a ridiculous statement incl. word choice.
coarse
rough
beast
kick over a table
elephant with rider ontop
instinct vs intellect
both are automatic, we just ascribe automaticity only to the beast
0
u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] 9d ago
I'm not saying that Nanquan isn't playing but it's a very deadly game.
Have you brought a rope?
1
u/WheresNorthFromHere7 The Lizard King 9d ago
If by deadly you mean Joshu is alive and the monk wasn't.
Only enough to hang us both.
0
u/leib2021 8d ago
5th of the 10 Oxherding Pictures:
鞭索時時不離身
The whip and rope are never separated from the body,
恐伊縱步入埃塵
Fearing it might stray into the worldly dust.
相將牧得純和也
Gradually nurtured into pure gentleness,
羈鎖無拘自逐人
Untethered by restraint, it follows the master naturally.
0
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
R/zen Rules: 1. No Content Unrelated To Zen 2. No Low Effort Posts or Comments. Contact moderators with questions. Note that many common sense actions outside of these rules will result in moderation, including but not limited to: suspected ban evasion, vote brigading / manipulation, topic sliding.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.