Home Uncategorized zen 5

Uncategorized

zen 5

1) Ishii describes (pp. 231–233) three types of gōng’àn and their relationship to masterdisciple instruction. What does the categorization of these types tell us about the relationship between religious pedagogy and readership? If the enlightenment being captured is experiential and individual, why categorize gōng’àn at all like this?

2) Analyze the reference chart of the Chan transmission lineage in Ishii’s article (pp. 237–239), but only focus on the first set of figures (“Śākyamuni” through “Huineng”). Using the case numbers beside each figure listed, cross-check titles of cases listed from the Mumonkan (pp. 215–217) and notes its placement in the sequence. First, does crosschecking Bodhidharma across these lists support or refute Faure’s argument about hagiography queried in Question #1 above? Second, what do you make of the nearperfect staggering of Śākyamuni as a presence in the gōng’àn collection? Finally, note any other peculiar patterns or points of interest that emerged from either these lists or Ishii’s article as a whole.

The Wu-men kuan (J.
Mumonkan): The Formation,
Propagation, and
Characteristics of a Classic
Zen Kōan Text

Ishii Shūdō

Translated by Albert Welter

Motivations for Researching the Wu-men kuan

The Wu-men kuan text is a record of the lectures from the Sung dy-
nasty Lin-chi (J. Rinzai) Ch’an monk, Wu-men Hui-k’ai.1 It is a kōan
collection containing forty-eight “cases.” In the monastic halls of Ja-
pan’s Rinzai sect, one often sees a prominently displayed notice an-
nouncing a “Lecture on the Wu-men kuan,” the Wu-men kuan being
one of the most widely read texts in the Rinzai sect. Nor is it the
case that the Wu-men kuan has no bearing on the Sōtō (C. Ts’ao-
t’ung) sect in Japan. According to the recently published work of
Ishikawa Rikizan, Zenshūsōden shiryō no kenkyū (Research on materi-
als concerning transmission inheritance in the Zen school), the Wu-
men kuan was deeply implicated in the so-called “heresy incident.”2

Two incidents occurred during the Edo period, the first in 1649
and the second in 1653. The first involved the expulsion of monks
responsible for undermining Sōtō doctrine connected to the three
major Sōtō temples in the Kantō region.3 The second involved a
similar expulsion of monks associated with Kasuisaiji, Sōjiji, and
Eiheiji temples. Both incidents involved the impermissible study of
heretical doctrines from outside the teachings established by the

208 the zen canon

Sōtō school. This study of heretical doctrines undermined Sōtō teaching and
violated the system for determining the relationship between head and branch
temples, and the rules of etiquette. As a result of the violation, numerous
monks, beginning with Bannan Eishū (1591–1654), were expelled. The Wu-
men kuan was one of the texts singled out as an object of criticism during the
“heresy incident”; Bannan Eishū was expelled for authoring the Mumonkan
shū, a commentary on the Wu-men kuan, at this time.4 Bannan was the person
who revived Kōshōji Temple, originally founded by Dōgen and located in Fu-
kakusa, by relocating it to its present site at Uji. Bannan passed away in 1654.
After his passing, Manzan Dōhaku (1636–1715) carried out a full-scale revival
of the Sōtō school. Manzan issued the Mumon ekai goroku (The recorded say-
ings of Wu-men Hui-k’ai), where he commented as follows: “After the Pi-yen
ji (or Pi-yen lu, Blue cliff anthology), a great number of works praised kōan.
Yet, the only one who resides on the path of liberation and reveals the funda-
mental source of their teaching is Wu-men Hui-k’ai. I know this from reading
the forty-eight-case Wu-men kuan.”5

As indicated here, Manzan, who is also known as the patriarch who revived
the Sōtō school, held out extraordinarily high praise for the Wu-men kuan. The
aforementioned work by Ishikawa Rikizan discusses in detail the important
status that kōan in the Wu-men kuan held in the Sōtō school during the Edo pe-
riod. Knowing that Sōtō school doctrine during the Edo period was like this, it
seems clear that the “heresy incident” was not simply a matter concerning a re-
jection of the Wu-men kuan text, but must be viewed from other perspectives.

Although the Wu-men kuan was, on occasion, the object of criticism in the
history of the Sōtō school, it was a frequently read text in the Rinzai school
along with the sacred scripture, the Pi-yen lu. In the Sōtō school the Ts’ung-
jung lu is referred to along with the Pi-yen lu. Because Wan-sung Hsing-hsiu
(1166–1246) praised such things as the one hundred cases in Hung-chih
Cheng-chüeh’s (1091–1157) Hung-chih sung-ku, it was referred to as a funda-
mental sacred text in the Sōtō school. Although he was the founder of Sōtō,
Dōgen never denied the role of the kōan, which was used to instruct Zen
practitioners in the history of the Sōtō school. With the continued influence
of the Rinzai school, the Wu-men kuan was a frequently read text in the Sōtō
school as well.

In recent years, studies on the vernacular use of language have flourished
in Chinese studies, and new problems have emerged concerning the traditional
reading of Ch’an “recorded sayings” (yü-lu, J. goroku) texts. As an example of
this, there is Iriya Yoshitaka’s three-volume annotated translation of the Pi-yen
lu.6 Iriya’s reading is completely different from the Japanese rendering of the
Chinese (kundoku) by Asahina Sōgen, former administrative director of Engaku
Temple.7 There is also an annotated translation of the Wu-men kuan based on
a new Japanese rendering of the Chinese by Hirata Takashi.8 Building on the
results of this previous work, Nishimura Eshin recently published an annotated

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 209

translation of the Wu-men kuan.9 In a review that I wrote on Nishimura’s
translation, I made a strong case for research into the hitherto completely
unindicated sources for the Wu-men kuan’s contents.10 I noted for the first time
that the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi was a source for the Wu-men kuan’s contents,
and indicated the need for a reevaluation of previous explanations that failed
to take this into account. The Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi had a huge influence
over Ch’an in the Sung dynasty, and is a text whose importance cannot be
disregarded.11 The results of my studies showed that references to the Tsung-
men t’ung-yao chi appear throughout the Wu-men kuan, and I am of the opinion
that the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi also exerted a large influence on the way the
Wu-men kuan should be read.

The following list indicates the place occupied by the Tsung-men t’ung-yao
chi among the important Ch’an texts of the Sung dynasty.

1004 Ch’eng-t’ien Tao-yüan compiles the Ching-te ch’uan-

teng lu.

1036 Li Tsun-hsü compiles the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu.
1038 Yuan-ch’en compiles the Hsüeh-tou hsien ho-shang ming-chüeh ta-

shih sung-ku ku-chi.
1052 Hsüeh-tou Ch’ung-hsien passes away at age seventy-three.
1093 Layman Mao-shan, also known as Yao Tzu, writes a preface for

the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi (contained in Eizan Library and
the National Diet Library).

1100 Chien-ch’i Tsung-yung writes the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi chi
(contained in Eizan Library and the National Diet Library).
[Did Yü Chang-li issue the first publication of the Tsung-men
t’ung-yao chi at this time?]

1101 Fo-kuo Wei-po compiles the Chien-chung ching-kuo hsü-teng lu.
1111 Yuan-Wu K’o-ch’in, living at the Ling-ch’üan Cloister on Mount

Chia in Li-chou, lectures on the Pi-yen lu.
1125 Hung-chih Cheng-chüeh, after having lived at the Ta-sheng p’u-

chao Temple in Szu-chou, writes the Hung-chih sung-ku.
1133 Hui-tse of the T’ien-ning Temple in Fu-t’ien reissues the Tsung-

men t’ung-yao chi. Keng Yen-hsi writes the Fu-t’ien hsin-k’ai
tsung-men t’ung-yao hsü (Tōyō bunko).

1135 Szu-ming Szu-chien republishes the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.
Layman Pen-jan, also known as Cheng Ch’en, writes a preface
for the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.

1146 Layman I-an of Mount Lu, also known as Liu, republishes the
Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.

1157 Layman Ta-yin, also known as Ch’en Shih, compiles the Ta-tsang
i-lan chi.

1179 The Szu-ming edition is reissued. The imperial prince, Wei
Wang, writes a postscript for the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.

1183 Hui-weng Wu-ming compiles the Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao.
1202 Cheng-shou of Thunder Hermitage compiles the Chia-t’ai p’u-

teng lu.

210 the zen canon

1224 Layman Shen Jan writes the preface for the Ts’ung-jung lu.
1228 Wu-men Hui-k’ai compiles the Wu-men kuan.
1229 The Wu-men kuan is published.
1230 Wu-men Hui-k’ai lectures on the Wu-men kuan at Jui-yen Tem-

ple in Ming-chou at the invitation of Wu-liang Tsung-shou.
1245 Meng Kung writes a postscript for the republication of the Wu-

men kuan.
1246 Layman An-wan (Cheng Ch’ing-chih) writes the Ti ssu-shih-chiu yu.
1252 Hui-ming compiles the Wu-teng hui-yuan.

As related in a previous study, I encountered the connection between the
Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi and Wu-men kuan on three noteworthy occasions.12

The first time was around thirty years ago, when I wrote an article on the Sung
edition of the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi contained in the library of the Tōyō
bunko.13 The second time occurred over a two year period between 1981 and
1982, when I studied under Yanagida Seizan at Kyoto University’s Humanities
Research Institute. The importance of the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi as a source
for Dōgen’s Mana Shōbōgenzō (Shōbōgenzō), written in Chinese, generally re-
ferred to as Sanbyakusoku [three hundred cases]) became clear to me at that
time.14 The third time occurred during my aforementioned investigation of the
sources for the Wu-men kuan, when it emerged that the Tsung-men t’ung-yao
chi was the source.

Previously, the text of the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi that I used was contained
in the library of the Tōyō bunko, a Sung edition issued in the third year of the
shao-hsing era (1133). Shiina Kōyū introduced a different Sung edition, the
Tsung-men t’ung-yao hsü-chi contained in the National Diet Library and an edi-
tion of the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi contained in the library of Eizan bunko.15

To my surprise, these editions were published in 1093, forty years before the
Sung edition that I had been using. The five lamp history texts (Wu-teng) of
Ch’an Buddhism were formed in order, starting with the Ching-te ch’uan-teng
lu (1004), and continuing with the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu (1036), Chien-chung
ching-kuo hsü-teng lu (1101), Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao (1183), and the Chia-t’ai
p’u-teng lu (1202). As a result, the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi had already been
issued when the Chien-chung ch’ing-kuo hsü-teng lu was published in 1101. This
makes the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi the first important Ch’an text after the Ching-
te ch’uan-teng lu and its successor, the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu.

A special feature of the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu is its inclusion of nu-
merous materials relating to the Lin-chi faction. Although this represented a
departure from the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu’s emphasis on the Fa-yen faction,
there is hardly any difference in characteristics between the two records. Nor
is there a great time difference between the publication of the two records. The
most conspicuous difference between the two works is the abundant inclusion
of “recorded sayings” contents in the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu for Ma-tsu Tao-i,
Pai-chang Huai-hai, Huang-po Hsi-yun, and Lin-chi I-hsüan, later compiled

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 211

into a separate text, the Ssu-chia yu-lu. The Sung transmission of the lamp
history (teng-shih) text that follows the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu is the Chien-
chung ching-kuo hsü-teng lu, but because the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi was formed
prior to it, we must recognize even more than before, the Tsung-men t’ung-yao
chi’s fundamental importance for understanding this formative period in the
development of Ch’an.

When the Northern Sung ended in 1127 and the era of the Southern Sung
dawned, Ch’an made the Southern Sung capital Hang-chou (Lin-an) its center.
It came to flourish there, and the institution of the Five Mountains (designa-
tions for the five leading Ch’an monasteries) was established. The Ch’an school
developed around the Five Mountains in present-day Che-chiang prefecture.
As indicated in my previous article, the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu and the Tsung-
men t’ung-yao chi were continually published in the Che-chiang region as two
works representative of Ch’an.16

The fact that they were issued together in this way is extremely interesting.
It is clear that Ch’an monks at that time read these two texts with very great
frequency. There are further matters surrounding the circumstances of their
publication. Concerning the Pi-yen lu, when Yü’an-Wu K’o-ch’in lectured on it
while living on Mount Chia in 1111, he offered critical acclaim for the one
hundred-case Hsüeh-tou sung-ku. In fact, in a portion of this critical acclaim,
the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi is quoted.17 As indicated previously, the Tsung-men
t’ung-yao chi was also quoted in the Wu-teng hui-yuan, compiled in 1252.18 Dis-
regarding the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi renders impossible the study of tenden-
cies in Ch’an from the period of the latter half of the eleventh through the
thirteenth centuries.

It is interesting to note that the Wu-men kuan has not been read in China
to the extent that it has in Japan. My own interest in the Wu-men kuan is to
learn the reason why such an overwhelming concern for this work has existed
throughout Japanese Zen history. This is one of the concerns addressed in the
present study.

The Formation Process of the Wu-men kuan

Among the publication and compilation of Ch’an works in the Sung dynasty,
the Wu-men kuan was compiled in the first year of the shao-ting era (1228). The
Wu-men kuan was compiled the year after Dōgen returned from China. As
stated above, both Dōgen and the Wu-men kuan are cited in the Tsung-men
t’ung-yao chi. I have already considered the degree of correspondence between
the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi and Wu-men kuan in my review of Nishimura’s
translation of the Wu-men kuan mentioned above, and will summarize the
details here.

Let us begin by looking at the activities of Wu-men Hui-k’ai, the compiler

212 the zen canon

of the Wu-men kuan, in relation to the compilation of the Wu-men kuan. The
primary source for the biography of Wu-men Hui-k’ai is the six-chapter Tseng-
chi hsü ch’uan-teng lu, compiled by Nan-shih Wen-hsiu in the Ming dynasty.19

Wu-men’s Dharma lineage is as follows:

Fen-yang Shan-chao (947–1024) → Tz’u-ming Ch’u-yuan (986–
1039) → Yang-ch’i Fang-hui (992–1049) → Pai-yün Shou-jui (1025–
1072) → Wu-tsu Fa-yen (?–1104) → K’ai-fu Tao-ning (1053–1113) →
Yueh-an Shan-kuo (1079–1152) → Ta-hung Tsu-cheng (dates un-
known) → Yueh-lin Shih-kuan (1143–1217) → Wu-men Hui-k’ai
(1183–1260) → Hsin-ti Chüeh-hsin (1207–1298).

This is the Dharma lineage of the Yang-ch’i branch of the Lin-chi faction.
Among the members of the Yang-ch’i branch, Yang-ch’i’s “grandson” Wu-tsu
Fa-yen had a particularly large influence on later developments.20 Among Wu-
tsu’s disciples, three achieved fame: Fo-kuo K’o-ch’in (1063–1135), the compiler
of the Pi-yen lu; Fo-chien Hui-ch’in (1059–1117); and Fo-yen Ch’ing-yuan (1067–
1120). Since they all shared the honorific name “Fo” (Buddha), they were com-
monly referred to as the “three buddhas.” Wu-men Hui-k’ai is in the lineage
descended from K’ai-fu Tao-ning, a fellow practitioner of these “three bud-
dhas.”

Hui-k’ai was born in Liang-chu, in Hang-chou (Che-chiang Prefecture).
His family name was Liu. His mother had the family name Sung. He inherited
the Dharma of Yueh-lin Shih-kuan. Hui-k’ai’s activities at this time are de-
scribed in the Tseng-chi hsü ch’uan-teng lu as follows.

[Hui-k’ai] paid respects to Monk Kung of T’ien-lung, and accepted
Monk Kung as his teacher. He practiced with Yüeh-lin at Wan-shou
[Temple] in Su[-chou]. Yüeh-lin had him read the account of [Chao-
chou’s] Wu (J. Mumonkan). Even after six years, [Hui-k’ai] was far
from penetrating its meaning. Thereupon, he summoned his will
and resolved to sever his doubts, saying “I will give up sleeping even
if it destroys me.” Whenever he felt perplexed, he walked down the
corridor and struck his head against a pillar. One day, while standing
near the lecturer’s seat [in the Dharma hall], he was suddenly awak-
ened when he heard the sound of the drum [calling the monks] for
the recitation of the monastic rules (chai). He composed a verse,
which said:

With the sun shining and the sky blue, the sound of thunder
peels open the eyeballs of the earth’s living beings.
The myriad phenomena existing between heaven and earth all

prostrate themselves;

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 213

Mount Sumeru leaps to his feet and dances the dance “three
stages.”21

The following day, he entered the master’s room seeking confirma-
tion for his attainment. Yueh-lin said in an off-hand manner,
“Whenever I look at kindred spirits (shen), I see nothing but demons
(kuei).” Hui-k’ai then shouted. Yueh-lin also shouted. Hui-k’ai then
shouted again. In this way, his awakening was confirmed.22

When we look at the process whereby Wu-men practices meditation, ex-
periences awakening, and inherits the Dharma, we can understand why his
teacher Yüeh-lin Shih-kuan plays such a large role in the Wu-men kuan. The
episode involving Chao-chou’s Wu that Yüeh-lin gave to Wu-men is one of the
most famous kōans, well-known to virtually everyone. When a monk asked
Chao-chou Ts’ung-shen: “Does a dog also have the Buddha-nature?” Chao-chou
responded: “Wu! (No)” In the Wu-men kuan, this Wu does not indicate the
relative wu in contrast to yu, but refers to absolute Wu transcending these
relative distinctions. In this way, the episode involving Chao-chou’s Wu serves
as the stereotypical kōan case. In another version of this experience of enlight-
enment, Wu-men was given this kōan by his teacher Yüeh-lin. For six years,
he grappled with it. His reported actions during this period have counterparts
in other sources, involving other masters. The action of “striking one’s head
against a pillar” is also attributed to Chung-feng Ming-pen (1263–1323) in
Hsüeh-lou Chu-hung’s Ch’an-kuan tse-chin. This episode brings to mind the
action of “picking up a chisel and jabbing oneself ” attributed to Tz’u-ming
Ch’u-yuan (986–1039) in the same source. This is an example of the behavior
prior to Wu-men.23 The great formulator of the Edo-period Rinzai sect, Hakuin
(1685–1768), was inspired upon reading this account of “picking up a chisel
and jabbing oneself.” It is said that he became devoted to his practice, jabbing
himself with a chisel, to awaken himself whenever he felt drowsy. Not to be
outdone by the account of “jabbing oneself with a chisel,” Wu-men struck his
head against a pillar to keep awake as he grappled with the episode involving
Chao-chou’s Wu. Then, one day he heard the sound of the drum and achieved
great awakening, commemorating the occasion with a four-line verse reflecting
his awakened state. On the day following his great awakening, he entered the
master’s room and was told by the master, “Where have I met such an idiot?”
Wu-men then let out an angry shout. Yüeh-lin also responded with an angry
shout. In response to this, Wu-men retorted with another angry shout. The
master and disciple formed a single entity here. Wu-men’s awakening was
acknowledged, and he inherited the Dharma.

There is a “recorded sayings” (yü-lu) text for Wu-men’s teacher, Yüeh-lin
Shih-kuan.24 At the end of it, there is a record of Yüeh-lin’s tomb inscrip-

214 the zen canon

tion, where it states the following: “When [students] went to [the master’s]
room, [Yüeh-lin] kept them off guard with his extraordinarily sharp verbal at-
tacks, so they would not go near him.”25 We know from this that Yüeh-lin was
especially hard on his students and very strict with lazy practitioners, to the
extent of being unapproachable. Wu-men was thus nurtured by this master,
Yüeh-lin.

Afterward, in the eleventh year of chia-ting (1218), Wu-men succeeded the
founding abbot Yüeh-lin at the Pao-yin yu-tz’u Ch’an Temple in Hu-chou. Wu-
men’s first appointment was serving after Yüeh-lin, as the second abbot. From
there he succeeded the denoted as abbot at the following locations. T’ien-ning
Ch’an Temple and Huang-lung ch’ung-en Ch’an Temple in Lung-hsing Dis-
trict; Ling-yen hsien-ch’in ch’ung-pao Ch’an Temple in P’ing River District; the
Ts’ui-yen kuang-hua Ch’an Temple in Lung-hsing District; again at the Huang-
lung ch’ung-en Ch’an Temple; P’u-ji Ch’an Temple on Mount Chiao in Chen
River District; K’ai-yuan Ch’an Temple in P’ing River District; Pao-ning Ch’an
Temple in Chien-k’ang District, until he became abbot of Hu-kuo jen-wang
Ch’an Temple in Hang-chou, in the sixth year of ch’un-yu (1246).26 Wu-men
instructed Ch’an practitioners at these important Ch’an temples successively,
and in his final years is said to have lived at a hermitage on the shores of West
Lake (in Hang-chou).

On one occasion, Wu-men was invited by Emperor Li-tsung (r. 1224–1264)
to lecture at the Hsuan-te Pavilion in the imperial palace. Whenever he was
called on to pray for rain, it is said that rain suddenly fell. As a result of these
achievements, Wu-men was awarded a gold-threaded Dharma-robe and the
honorific title Fo-yen (Buddha-eye) Ch’an Master. It is recorded that he forecast
his own death on the seventh day of the fourth month of the first year of ching-
ting (1260) with the parting verse: “With emptiness, there is no birth; with
emptiness, there is no death. If one realizes emptiness, one is no different
from emptiness.” He was seventy-eight years of age. Among disciples who
inherited his Dharma are Hsi-an Tsung, Patriarch Wu-ch’uan, Hsia-lü Wu-
chien, and Layman Fang-niu Yu, who are well known, and Shinichi Kakushin,
who is famous in Japan.

The Wu-men kuan makes it clear, however, that Wu-men became accom-
plished prior to his first appointment as an abbot of temple practitioners. Wu-
men’s own preface to the Wu-men kuan states as follows:

The mind the Buddha spoke of is the fundamental source (tsung);
gatelessness (Wu-men) is the Dharma-gate. If it is gateless, how do
you pass through it? Have you not heard it said that “nothing enter-
ing through the gate is valued by the family; whatever is obtained
through circumstance will not last.” In the summer of the first year
of chao-ting (1228), I, Hui-k’ai, headed the congregation at Lung-
hsiang Temple in Tung-chia. Because of the frequent requests of the

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 215

monks [for instruction], I proceeded to take cases (kung-an) [involv-
ing] past masters, using them as brickbats to batter the gate, guiding
the students in accordance with their capabilities. Eventually they
were recorded, inadvertently becoming an anthology. They have not
been arranged according to any particular order, altogether there are
forty-eight cases. It is generally referred to as the Wu-men kuan (Gate-
less gate).27

As stated here, Wu-men completed a compilation of forty-eight ancient
cases while chief meditator (shou-tso) at the Lung-hsiang Temple. He relates
that the forty-eight cases should not be considered in order. In an announce-
ment offered to the current emperor Li-tsung, Wu-men also stated: “The fifth
day of the first month of the second year of shao-ting (1229) graciously corre-
sponds to the emperor’s birthday. I, the humble monk Hui-k’ai, previously,
on the fifth day of the twelfth month of the first year [of shao-ting] (1228),
selected forty-eight cases regarding the awakening opportunities of buddha-
patriarchs for publication [in your honor],” and it is added that the forty-eight
cases were published on the fifth day of the twelfth month of the same year
(1229).28 In this way, the Wu-men kuan was compiled and published in a short
time span.

Concerning the term Wu-men used in the title of the work, we should
consider the following lecture recorded at the beginning of the Yüeh-lin yu-lu,
delivered at Mount Tao-ch’ang. “[Yueh-lin] pointed to the saying on the mon-
astery gate: ‘The mind which the Buddha spoke of is the fundamental source;
gatelessness is the Dharma-gate. Enter here with your whole self, and you
become specially joined with the entire universe.’ ”29

Regarding the use of the term Wu-men by Wu-men Hui-k’ai, Furuta
Shōkin proposes that it was adopted from Yüeh-lin.30 Given that we can ascer-
tain Yüeh-lin’s use of the term, I agree with Furuta’s proposition. By acknowl-
edging this, it becomes clear that the term Wu-men in the Wu-men kuan is
deeply connected with its author, Wu-men Hui-k’ai.

The Wu-men kuan that Wu-men compiled contains forty-eight kōans. The
four character titles of these kōans are listed as follows:31

1. Chao-chou’s “Wu!”
2. Pai-chang and the Fox
3. Chu-chih Raises a Finger
4. The Western Barbarian with No Beard
5. Huang-yen’s “Map up in a Tree”
6. The World Honored One Holds up a Flower
7. Chao-chou’s “Wash Your Bowl”
8. Hsi-chung the Wheelmaker
9. Ta-t’ung Chih-sheng

10. Ch’ing-shui Is Utterly Destitute

216 the zen canon

11. Chao-chou Sees the Hermits
12. Jui-yen Calls His Master
13. Te-shan Holds His Bowls
14. Nan-ch’üan Kills the Cat
15. T’ung-shan’s Sixty Blows
16. When the Bell Sounds, a Seven-Piece Robe
17. The National Preceptor Calls out Three Times
18. T’ung-shan’s “Three Pounds of Flax”
19. “Ordinary Mind Is the Way”
20. The Man of Great Strength
21. Yun-men’s “Shit-Stick”
22. Mahakasyapa’s “Knock down the Flagpole”
23. Think neither Good nor Evil
24. Feng-hsüeh’s Parting Words
25. The One in the Third Seat Preaches the Dharma
26. Two Monks Roll up the Blinds
27. “It Is Neither Mind nor Buddha”
28. Long Admired Lung-t’an
29. Neither the Wind nor the Flag
30. “Mind Itself Is Buddha”
31. Chao-chou Investigates an Old Woman
32. A Non-Buddhist Questions the Buddha
33. “No Mind, No Buddha”
34. “Wisdom Is Not the Way”
35. Ch’ien-nü’s Soul Separated
36. Meeting a Man of the Tao on the Road
37. The Oak Tree in the Front of the Garden
38. A Buffalo Passes through the Window
39. Yün-men Says “You Missed It”
40. Kicking over the Water Pitcher
41. Bodhidharma Pacifies the Mind
42. A Woman Comes out of Meditation
43. Shou-shan’s Staff
44. Pa-chiao’s Staff
45. “Who Is He?”
46. Step Forward from the Top of the Pole
47. Tou-lu’s Three Barriers
48. Ch’ien-feng’s One Road

The Ch’an lineages of the people appearing in these kōan are provided in
the essay at the end of Hirata Takashi’s translation of the Wu-men kuan. 32

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 217

The Special Circumstances Associated with the Propagation of
the Wu-men kuan in Japan

The individual who brought the Wu-men kuan to Japan was Shinichi Kakushin
(1207–1298). He inherited the Dharma from the Wu-men kuan’s author, Wu-
men Hui-k’ai.33 There is an interesting story regarding Shinichi Kakushin’s
awakening experience and his transmission of the Wu-men kuan to Japan. It
is said that when he was fifteen, Kakushin studied scriptures in Konobeakata.
He received full ordination at Tōdai-ji when he was twenty-nine. Subsequently,
he studied esoteric doctrine with Kakubutsu at the Denbō-in and practiced
under Gyōiu (Eisai’s Dharma heir) at the Kongō zanmai-in, and studied with
Dōgen at Fukakusa Gokuraku-ji. After this, he practiced with a number of
teachers, and then Kakushin went to Sung China at the age of forty-three,
studying with Ch’ih-chüeh Tao-ch’ung (Dharma heir of Ts’ao-yüan Tao-sheng)
on Mount Ching and Ching-sou Ju-ch’ueh (Dharma heir of Ch’ih-tun Chih-
ying) on Mount Tao-ch’ang, before experiencing awakening under Wu-men
Hui-k’ai. The entry for the first year of pao-yu (1253) in Kakushin’s Chronological
History states as follows.

The master [Shinichi Kakushin] was forty-seven years old. On the
twenty-eighth day of the second month, he climbed Mount Ta-mei
and paid respects at the tomb of Ch’an master [Fa-]ch’ang. He met
someone from Japan, Genshin. Because they had practiced together
in the past, Kakushin asked him, “I have not practiced here for a
long time. Have you met anyone yet with the wisdom of the enlight-
ened eye?” Genshin replied, “The monk Wu-men is an enlightened
master [encountered rarely] in an entire generation. You should go
and meet with him.” He then proceeded to go to Hu-kuo Temple in
Hang[-chou]. As soon as he met Wu-men, Wu-men grabbed him
and said: “I have no gate [for practitioners] here. Where have you
come from?” The master (Kakushin) answered: “I’ve come from Wu-
men’s place.” Wu-men then asked: “What is your name?” The mas-
ter replied: “Kakushin.” Wu-men then composed a verse that said:

Mind is Buddha;
Buddha is mind.
Mind and Buddha being in a state of suchness,
They extend through the past and the present.

The fact that Wu-men’s response was four lines of verse indicated that his
awakening had been certified. Wu-men called further to Kakushin, “You arrived
here quite late.” He then stood his fly whisk up and said: “Look!” Kakushin

218 the zen canon

experienced awakening as soon as Wu-men had uttered this word. It was the
twenty-eighth day of the ninth month. Kakushin then asked, “When you have
renounced everything, what do you use to instruct people with?” Wu-men
replied, “I look for the essence seen in each individual thing.” Kakushin bowed
in respect, and departed. Wu-men presented Kakushin with [a copy of] the Tui-
yü lu in two volumes and a monk’s robe.34

Shinichi Kakushin met Wu-men Hui-k’ai at Hu-kuo Temple and experi-
enced awakening there under him. Kakushin visited him once more after he
departed, and before returning to Japan. The leading entry for the following
year, the second year of pao-yu (1254), in Kakushin’s Chronological History states
as follows:

The master was forty-eight years old. On the twenty-seventh day of
the third month, he again visited [Wu-men Hui-k’ai at] Hu-kuo Tem-
ple. When he related his intention to return to Japan, Wu-men pre-
sented him with three pictures painted on silk of the Ch’an heroes
Bodhidharma, Han-shan, and Shih-te. On the twenty-ninth day, Kak-
ushin called on Wu-men to bid farewell. Wu-men said: “This brings
the matter to an end.” Kakushin then lit incense and bowed in re-
spect. Wu-men further presented Kakushin with [copies of] the Yüeh-
lin [yü-]lu and the Wu-men kuan.35

Accordingly, Shinichi Kakushin brought copies of the Yüeh-lin yü-lu, the
record of Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s teacher, and the Wu-men kuan to Japan. He ar-
rived in Hakata in the sixth month of that year (1254). He visited Gyōiu at the
Zenjō-in on Mount Kōya, and on the following day was promoted to chief
meditator. There is evidence of correspondence between Kakushin and Wu-
men Hui-k’ai under entries in the Chronological History for ages fifty and fifty-
one. Subsequently, Kakushin was invited by Ganjō to become founding abbot
of Saihō-ji on Mount Juhō in Yura in 1258. In the fourth year of kōan (1281),
he was invited by the retired emperor Kameyama to live at Shōrin-ji in the
capital. The same year, he was asked by Emperor Gouda to become the found-
ing abbot of Zenrin-ji, but he declined and returned to Saihō-ji. In 1285, he
was invited by Prime Minister Fujiwara Morotsugu and his son Moronobu to
live at Myōkō-ji in the capital. Kakushin was seventy-nine years old at the time.
Kakushin announced his passing at Saihō-ji on the thirteenth day of the tenth
month, 1298. He was ninety-two years old, and had been a monk for sixty-four
years. He was granted the honorific title Hōttō Zenji (Zen master Dharma
lamp) from retired emperor Kameyama, and received the posthumous title
Hōttō enmyō kokushi (Perfectly awakened national preceptor of the Dharma
lamp) from Emperor Godaigo.

Concerning the Wu-men kuan text that Kakushin brought to Japan, it
seems that the text went through several publications early on, and these are
the sources for existing versions of the text. In fact, the Wu-men kuan known

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 219

to us at present contains forty-nine rather than forty-eight cases, with the story
of “Huang-lung’s three barriers” added at the end. As a result, this presently
known text of the Wu-men kuan would not appear to be the originally published
text, but a republished version. According to Kawase Kazuma, the first publi-
cation of the Wu-men kuan in Japan was in 1291, but none of the editions
derived from this printing is known to us.36 The basis for Kawase’s explanation
is the following notice in an edition contained in the library of Daichō-in at
Kennen-ji:

This volume (i.e., the Wu-men kuan) exposes the marrow of the
buddha-patriarchs, and is the hammer for pounding open monk’s
eyes. Moreover, it has yet to be published in Japan. Accordingly, it
displays their great talent, and I will have a printer carve printing
blocks to publish it. At present, an edition of this text is located at
Saihō zen-in on Mount Juhō. With an expanded printing, it could be
transmitted endlessly. If there is some gentleman who has the in-
sight to take it upon himself, it will be said that even my efforts will
not have been fruitless. Signed by Shamon (Monk) Sōshin, on a ris-
ing tide in the middle of Spring in the Shōbō era.

Kawase understands the date to be 1291. The name of the Saihō zen-in,
which appears in the notice is also connected with Shinichi Kakushin, as noted
above. The versions of the Wu-men kuan that are in wide circulation at present
are from an edition first published in 1405. It is clear that this was not the first
publication. Moreover, since it states that the old edition had disappeared, we
can tell that the 1405 edition was the basis for those that were widely circulated.

At this point, I would like to change subjects and talk briefly about Shinichi
Kakushin and the Sōtō sect. Shinichi Kakushin, as the Dharma heir of Wu-
men Hui-k’ai, undeniably belonged to the Rinzai sect. His Dharma lineage is
referred to as the Hōttō faction. This faction has very deep connections with
the Sōtō sect.37 First of all, Keizan Jōkin (1264–1325), who created the basis for
the development of the Sōtō sect by founding Sōji-ji, studied with Kakushin.
In addition, Kakushin’s Dharma heir, Kohō Kakumyō (1271–1361), studied with
Keizan and received the bodhisattva precepts from him. Moreover, there was
intimate communication between Keizan and the Hōttō faction.

What is of further interest is the fact that Shinichi Kakushin also had a
large influence on and connection with Dōgen. As indicated in the chronolog-
ical history, Eihei-ji was actually erected for the enlightenment of Hōjō Masako
and the third Shōgun Sanetomo. This letter is not from an old record. It was
transmitted as an indication of the connection that both Kōkoku-ji and Eihei-
ji had to Sanetomo and Hōjō Masako. Sanetomo had wanted to visit the King
Asoka (A-yü wang) temple in China. He even constructed a boat to go to China
for that purpose. He had the Sung artisan Ch’en Ho-ch’ing build the boat, and
intended to moor it at Yuiga beach in Kamakura, but regrettably the boat did

220 the zen canon

not stay afloat. Consequently, Sanetomo’s plans for going to China were
dashed. According to the Chronological History, the one who fulfilled Sane-
tomo’s dream of going to China was Shinichi Kakushin, but Sugio Genyū
suggests that Dōgen might also have fulfilled it.38 Regarding the strange affinity
between Sanetomo and Dōgen, it is clear that there is an important connection
between them that cannot be ignored. However, in the absence of older sub-
stantiating documentation, one problematic point remains. The end of the
aforementioned entry for the third year of Karoku in the Chronological History
speaks of a connection between Dōgen and Kōkoku-ji. In the year 1227 when
this occurred, Dōgen was twenty-seven years old, and had just returned from
China. The entry claims that before returning to Kyoto, Dōgen stopped at
Kōkoku-ji (at the time named Saihō-ji) in Yura in Wakayama Prefecture, and
inscribed the nameplate for the temple. Because the presently existing Kōkoku-
ji no longer reflects the state of the temple at that time, the nameplate regret-
tably no longer exists.

In addition, there is another entry concerning Dōgen in the Chronological
History for the third year on ninji (1242): “The master (Shinchi Kakushin) was
thirty-six years old. He studied with Dōgen at the Gokuraku-ji in Fukakusa, to
the south of the city, and received the bodhisattva precepts [from him]. When
Dōgen was in China, he personally received transmission [of these bodhisattva
precepts] from T’ien-t’ung Ju-ching. Dōgen subsequently became an expert in
the Buddha-Dharma who founded Eihei-ji.”39

It is a historical fact that Shinichi Kakushin visited Dōgen prior to going
to China and received the bodhisattva precepts from him. Moreover, Dōgen
personally received these bodhisattva precepts from T’ien-t’ung Ju-ching when
he was in China. In Sugio Genyū’s study referred to above, a connection was
noted between Sanetomo, Kōkoku-ji, and Dōgen. Recently, Sugiō has main-
tained that the starting point of Dōgen Zen, Dōgen’s enlightenment experience
of “dropping off of body and mind” (shinjin datsuraku), stands between Dōgen’s
experiences on Mount A-yü-wang and his connection with Sanetomo.40 This
is a large issue in Dōgen studies. Here, I can do nothing more than point it
out.

As indicated in the chart above outlining publications of Zen texts in the
Sung dynasty, the Wu-men kuan was frequently read during Wu-men’s lifetime,
but there is little evidence that it was read in China after this.41 However, the
Wu-men kuan was read with very great frequency in Japan. Of course, it was
naturally read in the Rinzai sect, but it was regarded with importance in the
Sōtō sect as well. According to research by Yanagida Seiji, the number of trans-
lations of the Wu-men kuan in Japan is extremely high.42 What of the situation
of Zen in Korea? Many old Ch’an works were published in Korea, but the Wu-
men kuan, or its translations, do not appear among them.43

The popularity of the Wu-men kuan was unique to Japan, and created an
extraordinary sensation there. The initiation of this phenomenon was created

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 221

when Dharma Lamp National Preceptor Shinichi Kakushin (1207–1298), the
traveler to Sung China and inheritor of Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s Dharma, brought
the Wu-men kuan to Japan.

New Perspectives on the Material Cited in the Wu-men kuan

Regarding the content of the text, I will investigate problems connected to the
citation of the sixth kōan in the Wu-men kuan, the story entitled “The World-
Honored One Holds up a Flower.” At the same time, I would like to consider
the special circumstances associated with the adoption of the Wu-men kuan by
the Japanese people, especially their understanding of the “flower” (or “blos-
som”) in this case.

The story “The World-Honored One Holds up a Flower” is one of the best
known Zen kōans.44 It relates how the World-Honored One (Śākyumuni Bud-
dha), on one occasion, faced a large group of assembled practitioners. Just as
he was about to begin to preach, Brahma offered him a flower. The World-
Honored One took the flower and held it up, while remaining silent. The
practitioners wondered what he was doing, and thinking it strange, did not
understand it at all. Only Mahākāśyapa broke into a smile. The passage of the
original text in the Wu-men kuan, along with the commentary by Wu-men Hui-
k’ai, reads as follows:

The World-Honored One long ago instructed the assembly on Vul-
ture Peak by holding up a flower. At that time, everyone in the as-
sembly remained silent; only Mahākāśyapa broke into a smile. The
World-Honored One stated, “I possess the treasury of the true
Dharma-eye, the wondrous mind of nirvana, the subtle Dharma-gate
born of the formlessness of true form, not established on words and
letters, a special transmission outside the teaching. I bequeath it to
Mahākāśyapa.”
Wu-men’s comment:
Yellow-faced Gautama really mocked his listeners. He denigrated
good people as despicable sorts who sold dog’s meat labeled as
sheep’s head. He thought that this was somehow ingenious [but in
fact it was not]. But if everyone in the assembly had smiled at that
moment, how would the treasury of the true Dharma-eye been
transmitted? Or, suppose that Mahākāśyapa had not smiled, how
would the treasury of the true Dharma-eye been transmitted? If you
say that the treasury of the true Dharma-eye is transmitted, the yellow-
faced geriatric is a bumpkin-cheating city-slicker. If you say it is not
transmitted, then why did he approve of Mahākāśyapa?
[Wu-men’s] verse:

222 the zen canon

Holding up a flower,
[the Buddha] revealed his tail.
When Mahākāśyapa broke into a smile;
Humans and gods were all bewildered.45

There is not even the slightest trace that this story “The World-Honored
One Holds up a Flower” existed in India. It is generally believed to have first
appeared in the Ta fan-t’ien wen-fo chüeh-i ching (The scripture in which Brah-
man asks Buddha to resolve his doubts), a scripture fabricated in China. The
story is connected to portions of the text in the two versions of the Ta fan-t’ien
wen-fo chüeh-i ching contained in the Zokuōkyō edition, to one passage in the
two-chapter version, and to two passages in the one-chapter version.46 Any of
these passages from the Ta fan-t’ien wen-fo chüeh-i ching could be the source
for “The World-Honored One Holds up a Flower” story recorded in the Wu-
men kuan. For example, this is the allegation made in the earliest surviving
translation of the Wu-men kuan in Japan, the Mumonkan jiunshō, by Kihaku
Genbō of the Genjō branch of the Rinzai sect, and has been explained in recent
years in the works by Hirata Takashi and Nishmura Eshin.

In addition, another well-read work in Japan, the Tsung-men tsa-lu [Mis-
cellaneous records of the Ch’an school], contained in chapter five of the Jen-
t’ien yen-mu [The eyes of humans and gods] (compiled in 1188), provides the
following verification for the source of the Wu-men kuan story, “The World-
Honored One Holds up a Flower”:

Wang, the duke of Ching, asked Ch’an master Fo-hui Ch’üan:
“What source is [the story] The World-Honored One Holds up a
Flower related by members of the Ch’an lineage (ch’an-chia) based
on?”

[Ch’an master] Ch’üan replied, “It is not contained at all in the
scriptures of the [Buddhist] canon.”

The duke said: “The other day in the Han-lin Academy, I hap-
pened to read the three-chapter Scripture in Which [Brahma Asks]
Buddha to Resolve His Doubts (Wen-fo chüeh-i ching). Based on what I
read there, a passage from this scripture unequivocally contains the
story. [It states that] when the Brahma king lived on Vulture Peak,
he presented to the Buddha a gold-colored po-lo flower. He withdrew
to take up his seat, asking the Buddha to preach the Dharma for the
sake of sentient beings. The World-Honored One got up from his
seat and communicated to the assembly by holding up the flower.
None of the hundreds of myriads of humans and gods grasped [the
meaning of this]. Only one among them, the gold-colored ascetic,
broke into a smile. The World-Honored One stated: “I possess the

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 223

treasury of the true Dharma eye, the wondrous mind of nirvana, the
formlessness of true form. I now bequeath it to Mahākāśyapa.” This
scripture discusses frequently how Indra served the Buddha and
asked him questions. As a consequence, it contains secrets which
the world has yet to hear.”47

Wang, the duke of Ching, referred to here is Wang An-shih. Based on the
information presented here, the Ta fan-t’ien wang wen-fo chüeh-i ching already
existed in China at this time. However, there is a persuasive argument by a
member of the Sōtō sect that the version of the scripture contained in Zokuōkyō
was created in Japan during the Edo period.48 Nukariya Kaiten successfully
adopted this argument in his own research.49 I have also adopted the argument
that it was compiled in Japan, concurring with the argument made by Nukariya.

Based on this, kōan number six in the Wu-men kuan, “The World-Honored
One Holds up a Flower,” is not based on an apocryphal scripture, even though
the same story appears in the Ta fan-t’ien wang wen-fo chüeh-i ching. Among
Ch’an “transmission records” (teng-lu), the story “The World-Honored One
Holds up a Flower” first appears in chapter 2 of the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu
[T’ien-sheng era supplementary transmission record], in the entry for Mahāk-
āśyapa.50 Prior to this, we know that members of the Lin-chi lineage transmitted
the story “The World-Honored One Holds up a Flower”; it is contained in
sources such as the Recorded Sayings (yü-lu) of Tz’u-ming (a.k.a. Shih-shuang)
Ch’u-yüan (986–1039), for which there is a preface dated 1027.51 The fact that
the Wu-men kuan developed the story “The World-Honored One Holds up a
Flower” based on the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi is readily apparent from a com-
parison of case number six in the Wu-men kuan and the following entry on
Sakyamuni from chapter 1 of the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.

The wording of the two versions is exactly the same. Following the Tsung-
men t’ung-yao chi version are comments by Lin-chi masters Hai-hui Tuan and
Huang-lung Hsin. Even though the Ta fan-t’ien wen-fo chüeh-i ching is under-
stood to be the source for “The World-Honored One Holds up a Flower” story
in translations of the Wu-men kuan into Japanese, the fact that the Tsung-men
t’ung-yao chi was actually the source means that the story was already func-

224 the zen canon

tioning as a kōan. This is known from the comments of Lin-chi masters ap-
pended to the end of the story in the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi, where the mean-
ing of the story is discussed in kōan-like fashion.

Next, I turn to the question of the flower. What kind of flower was it that
the World-Honored One held up? What is the “gold-colored po-lo flower” men-
tioned in the Ta fan-t’ien wen-fo chüeh-i ching? Because Dōgen referred to the
flower in this story as the udonge or “udon flower” in the Shōbōgenzō, it is
postulated to be udumbara in Sanskrit, but it probably refers to the image of a
lotus blossom (Skt. utpala) generally acknowledged as the representative flower
of Indian Buddhism. Let us next consider the problem of the flower presented
in case number nineteen in the Wu-men kuan, the story “Ordinary Mind Is
the Way.”

Nan-ch’üan, in passing, was asked by Chao-chou: “What Is the
Way?” Nan-ch’üan replied, “Ordinary mind is the Way.” Chao-chou
asked: “Then should I direct myself toward it, or not?” Nan-ch’üan
answered, “When you try to direct yourself toward it, you go away
from it.” Chao-chou persisted, “How will I know it is the Way unless
I try for it?” Nan-ch’üan responded, “The Way is not something one
knows or does not know. Knowing is an illusion; not knowing is
blankness. If you truly attain the Way without effort, it is vast and
boundless like the great void. How can you insist on [categorizing it
in terms of] right and wrong?” With these words, Chao-chou was
suddenly awakened.
Wu-men’s comment:
Questioned by Chao-chou, Nan-ch’üan straight away made the tile
disintegrate and the ice melt, and [showed that] explanations were
impossible, even though Chao-chou experienced awakening, he
must practice for another thirty years before he will begin to get it.
[Wu-men’s] verse:

A hundred flowers in spring, the moon in autumn;
A cool breeze in summer, snow in winter.
If trivial matters do not clutter your mind,
It is a good season for such a person.53

“Ordinary mind is the Way” means that our normal mind is the Way, just
as it is. “The Way” (tao) is one of the ancient translations for the Sanskrit term
bodhi. The Chinese considered “the Way” to be the same as “awakening” (sa-
tori). Given this meaning, the phrase “Ordinary mind is the Way” can be said
to represent the zenith of Chinese Ch’an.

However, when we read Wu-men’s commemorative verse for this kōan,
we are reminded of Dōgen’s poem Honrai menmoku (Poem: The original
face).54

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 225

Haru wa hana, natsu totogisu, aki wa tsuki, fuyu wa kiete suzushikari-
keri.55

Although this verse was originally famous among Dōgen’s poetic works,
what attracted even more attention was the citation of it by Kawabata Yasunari
at the beginning of his commemorative presentation in Stockholm when he
was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, in 1968.56 Seidensticker translated
the verse as follows.

In the spring, cherry blossoms; in the summer, the cuckoo.
In the autumn, the moon; in the winter, snow, clear, cold.

It is unclear whether Dōgen was thinking of “cherry blossoms” (sakura no
hana) when he mentioned hana (flower) in his verse. Prior to considering this,
let’s look at the problem concerning the Sanshōdōeishū, which contains this
verse. According to the explanation of Funazu Yōko, Dōgen did not write all
of the verses in the Sanshōdōeishū. A verse with the same title, Honrai no
menmoku (The original face) is contained in the Hekigan hyaku kattō (A hun-
dred entanglements on the blue cliff by Kyōkai): Haru wa hana, natsu totogisu,
aki wa tsuki, fuyu wa takane ni yuki zo furikeri [translation (following Seiden-
sticker): In the spring, cherry blossoms; in the summer, the cuckoo; in the
autumn, the moon; in the winter, without amassing, snow continues to fall].
Funazu considers this as follows: “A similar poem appears in the Hekigan
hyaku kattō, a work by Kyokai Tōryū (?–1852) which commits the Hekigan roku
(Pi-yen lu, Blue cliff record) to verse. Considering the time that it was written,
it would seem that Kyōkai’s verse is an adaptation of the one from Dōgen’s
Sanshōdōeishū. But it is also possible that it is based on a verse by an unknown
author transmitted by Zen monks since ancient times as representative of the
circumstances of Zen monks’ lives.”57

Funazu simply pointed out that the authorship of the original verse is
unclear. However, it is possible to consider that the verse by Wu-men Hui-k’ai
in his commentary to the kōan “Ordinary Mind Is the Way” was the source,
especially given that it was popular in Japan and had been transmitted over a
long period of time.

Concerning the issue of the “flower” (hana), one is reminded of Dōgen’s
use of the term in Genjokōan: “Moreover, whatever one says, it is regrettable
when blossoms (hana) scatter; it is sorrowful when weeds flourish.”58

Because it states that when they scatter it is regrettable, it seems that in
this case the “flowers” referred to are cherry blossoms. However, in the case
of Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s verse “In the spring, a hundred flowers,” I doubt if we
can think of the “hundred flowers” as cherry blossoms. Wu-men, who was
Chinese, would not have been thinking of cherry blossoms. It is more likely
that Wu-men would have been thinking of peach blossoms. The Zen poem,
“The willow is green, the blossoms (hana) are red,” is well known, but in

226 the zen canon

chapter 2 of the Wu-tsu fa-yen yu-lu [The recorded sayings of Wu-tsu Fa-yen],
there is the verse, “The willow is green, the peaches are red.”59 When one
speaks of “flowers” in the Chinese context, peach blossoms are representative.
In the Ch’an school, the story of Kuei-shan Ling-yu’s disciple Ling-yün Chih-
ch’in experiencing awakening upon seeing a peach blossom is famous, as is
the story of Hsiang-yen Ch’ih-hsien experiencing awakening upon hearing the
sound of bamboo striking a rock. If Dōgen had said, “In the spring, flowers
(hana),” he probably would have been referring to plum blossoms, which
bloom in early spring. There is a work entitled Cheng-fa yen-tsang mei-hua
(Shōbōgenzō Baika, The plum blossoms of the eye treasury of the true Dharma),
connected with the fact that Dōgen’s teacher, T’ien-t’ung Ju-ching, was very
fond of plum trees. As a result, the cultural traditions passed down among
Chinese and Japanese are not necessarily the same when it comes to flowers,
which are representative of the respective cultures. Moreover, among Japanese
there are various seasonal considerations as well. Dōgen did not simply say,
“In the spring, flowers.” Given that his poem reads, “it is regrettable when
blossoms (hana) scatter; it is sorrowful when weeds flourish,” it is likely that
the text was conceived in response to nature.

However, in addition to the famous words of Dōgen in Genjokōan, there
survives an exchange connected with the figure known as Niu-t’ou Ching, a
Dharma-heir of the Kuei-yang lineage master, Pa-chiao Hui-ch’ing, recorded
in chapter 25 of the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu.

Someone asked: “What is your teaching style, master?”
The master (Niu-t’ou Ching) replied: “It is regrettable when blos-
soms fall; it is sorrowful when weeds flourish.”60

No one who considers this famous poem by Dōgen would think that it
was not Dōgen’s own composition, but the words uttered here by Niu-t’ou
Ching suggests otherwise.61 What kind of “blossoms” was Niu-t’ou Ching re-
ferring to? Because he was Chinese, and a member of the Kuei-yang lineage,
he was probably referring to peach blossoms. From the use of the verb “fall”
(ochi), it is possible to imagine that he was referring to the mu-tan or shao-yao
flower. All that we can say for sure is that the “flower” he referred to was not
the cherry blossom.

Since there is such a large difference between Japanese and Chinese peo-
ple’s understandings of “flower,” this raises the question of differences of per-
ception between Chinese and Japanese regarding the expression “Ordinary
mind is the Way.” The verses from the Wu-men kuan, hugely popular among
Japanese as mentioned previously, were understood differently in the Japanese
context from the way they were intended in China. As a result, I would suggest
that in the adaptation of the Wu-men kuan to the Japanese context, there was
a tendency to affix meanings that were unintended by the Chinese.

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 227

The Nature of the Wu-men kuan

The most prominent feature of the Wu-men kuan is displayed in its first kōan,
known either as “Chao-chou’s Dog” or “Chao-chou’s Word Wu (No).” We can
investigate the way that this kōan was originally understood by looking to Wu-
tsu Fa-yen.62 The last chapter of the Wu-tsu Fa-yen yu-lu states as follows.

[Chao-chou] entered the hall [to address the assembly]. A monk asked
Chao-chou: “Does a dog have the Buddha-nature, or not?” Chao-
chou replied: “Wu (Not)” The monk asked: “All sentient beings,
without exception, have the Buddha-nature. How is it that a dog
does not?” Chao-chou replied: “Because it remains in a state of kar-
mic consciousness.”
Master [Wu-tsu] commented: “How do you members of the great as-
sembly understand the quest for permanence? If I seek permanence
by simply uttering the word Wu! my search is over. If you penetrate
this one word, no one in the world will be able to question you.
How will you penetrate it? Have you penetrated it thoroughly and
gotten to the bottom of it? If you have, come forward and say it for
me. I do not need you to say that you have done it, nor do I need
you to say that you haven’t, nor do I need you to say that you have
neither done it nor have not done it. What will you say? Please take
care.63

Originally, the question “Does a dog have the Buddha-nature” and Chao-
chou’s reply “Wu! (No)” appeared in the Chao-chou lu (Record of Chao-chou).
When the questioner supposed that the dog did not have the Buddha-nature,
Chao-chou replied that it did have it. In this way, in spite of the fact that two
responses are recorded in the Chao-chou lu, the positive response was elimi-
nated and only the negative response Wu! continued to be recorded in the kōan
version of the exchange. The clue to this transformation can be inferred from
the above cited Recorded Sayings of Wu-tsu Fa-yen. One of Wu-tsu Fa-yen’s de-
scendants was Ta-hui Tsung-kao, the formulator of the style of Ch’an known
as k’an-hua ch’an (J. kanna zen, the Ch’an/Zen of kōan introspection phrases).
Ta-hui referred frequently to the kōan involving Chao-chou’s Wu! He explains
the structure of this kōan in the “Lecture given at the request of a noblewoman
from the principality of Ch’in,” the mother of Prime Minister Chang Chun,
contained in chapter 14 of the Ta-hui P’u-chüeh Ch’an-shih yu-lu (The recorded
sayings of Chan Master Ta-hui P’u-chüeh). The noblewoman from the prin-
cipality of Ch’in was the best of Ta-hui’s female students and a powerful donor
of Ta-hui’s.

One time, the noblewoman made a request to Ta-hui’s disciple, K’ai-
shan Tao-ch’ien, “Please explain to me how Monk Ching-shan [Ta-

228 the zen canon

hui] normally instructs practitioners?” Tao-ch’ien replied, “Monk Ta-
hui simply presents the story “A Dog Has No Buddha-nature” or
“Shou-shan’s Bamboo Comb” to practitioners. On such occasions,
no matter what the practitioner says or thinks, the Master criticizes
it; as soon as they try to do anything, as soon as they try to say any-
thing, the Master responds with criticism. [The solution to these]
cannot be grasped at all through [the use of] distinctions or
words.”[Tao-ch’ien] explained it by simply relating [the lines] “Does a
dog have the Buddha-nature? Wu (No)!” Listening to this, the noble-
woman put her faith in it and both day and night grappled with the
word Wu (No). The noblewoman had regarded reading scriptures
and performing offerings to the buddhas as normal Buddhist prac-
tice. However, Tao-ch’ien told her: “If you consider how Monk Ta-
hui sought awakening through ordinary daily activities, you will re-
frain from planned activities, reading scriptures, performing
offerings to the buddhas, chanting invocations, and so on, and just
grapple with the kōan word Wu! If you concentrate on reading scrip-
tures, performing offerings to the buddhas, and become attached to
seeking blessings through these activities, on the contrary, they be-
come obstacles to seeking awakening. However, after you have at-
tained awakening, [Ta-hui] teaches that it is possible to read scriptu-
res, make offerings to the buddhas, offer flowers and burn incense,
and to perform the confession ritual and engage in all of the superb
activities of the buddhas, as is natural.”

When the Noblewoman heard what Tao-ch’ien said, she divested
herself from reading scriptures and performing offerings to the
Buddhas, and concentrated on sitting in meditation and the kōan
word Wu! One year, during the winter, she suddenly experienced
awakening. Excitedly, she stood up, and was able to experience a
world of sudden joy, realizing this kōan word Wu! as if sitting in
mediation in the meditation hall.64

Here we have Ta-hui’s method of seated meditation (C. tso-ch’an, J. zazen),
and his method of grappling with the “critical phrase” (C. hua-t’ou, J. watō)
during seated meditation, his so-called k’an-hua ch’an (J. kanna zen) method
simply explained for us.65 Moreover, we can easily understand from this that
Ta-hui recommended the use of the Wu kōan.

Wu-men Hui-k’ai developed the first kōan in the Wu-men kuan, the story
of “Chao-chou’s Dog,” through the tradition conveyed by Wu-tsu Fa-yen and
Ta-hui Tsung-kao. Although I introduced the following material in the previous
volume in this series, The Kōan: Texts and Contexts in Zen Buddhism, it is
indispensable for understanding the Wu-men kuan as well.

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 229

A monk asked Chao-chou: “Does a dog have the Buddha-nature?”
Chao-chou answered: “Wu!”
Wu-men’s comment:
“In studying Ch’an, one must pass through the barrier set up by the
patriarchs. To attain inconceivable enlightenment (miao-Wu), one
must completely eliminate mental activity. Those who have not
passed through the barrier of the patriarchs and eliminated mental
activity are all ghosts inhabiting plants and trees. Now, tell me, what
is the barrier of the patriarchs? It is none other than the one word
“Wu!” spoken by Chao-chou here. This is the first barrier of the
Ch’an school (tsung-men). As a result, I have titled this work “The
Gateless Barrier of the Ch’an School” (Ch’an-tsung Wu-men kuan).
Those who are able to pass through this barrier not only meet with
Chao-chou as a close friend, they will further be able to walk hand
in hand with the patriarchs of history, intimately linked eyebrow to
eyebrow. They will see with the same eyes as the patriarchs and hear
with the same ears. What a wonderful thing this is!

Now, is there anyone who wants to pass through this barrier? If
so, then with your 360 bones and 84,000 pores, you will produce
one irresolvable doubt throughout your entire body—concentrate on
what this word Wu is, and absorb yourself day and night with this
problem. Do not misunderstand the word Wu either in terms of
Taoist “nihilism” (hsü-wu) or as “nonexistence” (yu-wu) conceived
dualistically in terms of “existence” and “nonexistence” (yu-wu). It is
like swallowing a red-hot ball of iron and trying to spit it out, but
without success. If you wash away completely the depraved knowl-
edge and perverse theories studied previously, applying yourself ear-
nestly over a long period, distinctions like “inner” and “outer” will
naturally be fused together. Your experience is like a deaf-mute who
has a dream. You yourself are the only one who knows about it. You
cannot communicate it to anyone else. When suddenly the doubt is
resolved (that is, you break through the barrier), this event will
astonish the heavens and shake the earth. It is as if you have
snatched the great sword away from General Kuan-yü, met the Bud-
dha and killed the Buddha, met the patriarchs and killed the patri-
archs. Living in the world of birth and death (samfi sāra) you have at-
tained complete freedom. Continually experiencing life according to
the four modes of life on the six transmigratory paths, you wander
joyfully in samādhi.
What then should one do to exert oneself with this word Wu?
Exhausting all your spiritual energy in this constant pursuit, you
must absorb this word Wu. If you succeed without wavering for a

230 the zen canon

moment, it will seem as if the light of the Dharma suddenly ignited
in your mind.
[Wu-men’s verse:]

Does a dog have the Buddha-nature?
The Buddhas and patriarchs have completely resolved this doubt.
Whether you answer “yes” or “no,”
Your fate is sealed.66

In this way, the story “Chao-chou’s Dog” is the story of how to grapple
with the one word Wu! by focusing one’s whole body and entire spirit on it.
The way to concentrate on the one word Wu! is explained relatively clearly by
Wu-men Hui-k’ai, the author of the Wu-men kuan, in the final chapter of the
Wu-men Hui-k’ai yü-lu (The recorded sayings of Wu-men Hui-k’ai), as follows.

And, [a student] raised the point that revered masters throughout
history have presented verses on the story “A Dog Has No Buddha-
Nature.” The master [Wu-men] said: “I too have a verse. It is similar
to those presented by others. I dare not employ reason. If I believe
in it completely, I will attain perfect freedom while standing on the
shore of birth and death.”
[Wu-men’s verse:]

No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!
No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!67

According to Wu-men’s Recorded Sayings, many Ch’an teachers throughout
history composed verses for the “Dog Has No Buddha-nature” story, and Wu-
men himself also composed one. The verse composed by Wu-men repeats the
word Wu (No) twenty times. At the same time that the verse relates the special
feature of Wu-men’s teaching, one feels that there is something unusual about
it. Iriya Yoshitaka makes the following comment regarding this.

I have held doubts for some time even with regard to the way
the so-called “Chao-chou’s Word No” has been previously dealt with.
To the question “Does a dog have the Buddha-nature?”, on the one
hand Monk Chao-chou replied affirmatively, but on the other hand
he replied negatively. However, Zen adherents in Japan have ren-
dered the kōan exclusively in terms of his negative response, and
completely ignored the affirmative one. Moreover, it has been the
custom from the outset to reject the affirmative response as superfi-
cial compared to the negative one. It seems that the Wu-men kuan is
responsible for this peculiarity.68

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 231

With regard to this, case number 18 in chapter 2 of the Hung-chih lu
(Record of Hung-chih) (equals case number 18 in the Ts’ung-jung lu) states the
following.

A kōan was introduced. A monk asked Chao-chou: “Does a dog have
the Buddha-nature?” Chao-chou replied: “Yes.” The monk asked: “If
it already has it, why is it thrust into this bag of skin?” Chao-chou
replied: “To purposely assault your assumptions.”

On another occasion, a monk asked: “Does a dog have the Buddha-
nature?” Chao-chou replied: “No.” The monk asked: “All sentient beings, with-
out exception, have the Buddha-nature. How is it that a dog does not?” Chao-
chou replied: “Because it remains in a state of karmic consciousness.”69

Dōgen’s Shōbōgenzō “Busshō” [Shōbōgenzō, “Buddha Nature” fascicle] was
developed from this kōan. Hung-chih Cheng-chüeh dealt with the kōan by
combining both the affirmative and negative responses. The Wu-men kuan
systemized the Lin-chi (J. Rinzai) k’an-hua ch’an (J. kanna zen) tradition, dis-
tinguishing itself from Hung-chih by focusing exclusively on the negative re-
sponse.70

Yet, as previously stated, in the Lin-chi (Rinzai) school the Wu-men kuan
is a collection of kōan cases with which one must grapple all costs. However,
Hirata Takashi is critical toward the traditional way of dealing with the Wu-
men kuan in the Japanese Rinzai school. In the “Explanation” section of Hir-
ata’s previously mentioned translation of the Wu-men kuan, he states the fol-
lowing: “As is the case within our own house (that is, the Rinzai school), there
are masters without vision who make us labor over the Wu-men kuan, inves-
tigating each case in order, one after another, from the first to the forty-eighth.
They are fools who know nothing at all of Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s intention when
he stated, ‘Do not treat them in order, from first to last.’ ”71

According to this perspective, it is unnecessary to treat all of the forty-eight
cases in order. Which of the forty-eight cases, then, have traditionally been
regarded as important in the Japanese Rinzai school? Hirata employs a tradi-
tional scheme in classifying the kōan into three types: li-chih (J. richi), chi-k’an
(J. kikan), and hsiang-shang (J. kōjō).72 Li-chi refers to cases in which the Zen
instructor guides practitioners by teaching them to focus on the general as-
sumption and idea of the kōan. Chi-k’an refers to the method whereby the
instructor guides practitioners by providing individually directed hints and sug-
gestions one way or another. Hsiang-shang, because it means “above,” refers to
when the teacher breaks beyond the former two methods of instruction and
indicates to the practitioner to go beyond (that is, literally, “above”) them. The
type that appears first in the Wu-men kuan is the li-chih, which is found in the
first kōan, “Chao-chou’s Dog.” As examples of the chi-k’an type, there is kōan
number 14, “Nan-ch’üan Kills the Cat,” as well as number 43, “Shou-shan’s
Bamboo Comb.” An example of the hsiang-shang type is found in kōan number

232 the zen canon

13, “Te-shan’s Begging Bowl.” Kōan number 38, “A Buffalo Passes through the
Window,” is regarded as an important kōan that proceeds through all three
types. Being outside of the Rinzai Zen tradition, the above is simply my per-
sonal understanding of the characteristics of the Wu-men kuan.

Case 14, “Nan-ch’üan Kills the Cat” is also a well-known kōan. When Nan-
ch’üan P’u-yuan saw practitioners from the eastern and western monks’ halls
arguing about a cat, he grabbed the animal and posed a question to them, “If
you can utter one enlightened word, I will spare the cat. If you cannot, I will
kill it.” None of them could respond to this, so Nan-ch’üan killed the cat. In
the evening, Chao-chou returned to the temple. Nan-ch’üan told him of the
day’s incident. When Chao-chou heard about it, he removed his sandals, put
them on his head, and walked away. Seeing this, Nan-ch’üan said: “Had you
been there, the cat could have been saved.” Wu-men commented in his verse,
“Had Chao-chou been there, he would have taken action. Had he snatched the
sword away, Nan-ch’üan would have begged for his life.”73

The next case, 43 is also a typical kōan. It is often referred to by Ta-hui
Tsung-kao along with his comments on Chao-chou’s Wu! kōan. Shou-shan
Sheng-nien held up his staff and said: “If you monks call this a “staff,” you are
complicit in the restrictions imposed on it by others (that is, affirm its exis-
tence). If you don’t call it a “staff,” you invalidate what others assume (that is,
deny its existence). So, what do you call it?” In his verse, Wu-men stated,
“Holding up a staff, he is carrying out the orders to let live and to kill. If
complicity in restricting it (that is, affirming its existence) and invalidating
assumptions (that is, denying its existence) are both advanced, even the bud-
dhas and patriarchs will beg for their lives.”74

Case 13, “Te-shan’s Begging Bowl,” is a kōan that combines comic and
serious aspects. One day, Te-shan Hsüan-chien was on his way to the dining
hall with his bowl. His disciple Hsüeh-feng I-ts’un asked him: “Venerable
master, the bell and the drum signaling meal time have not been sounded.
Where are you going with your bowl?” Te-shan immediately returned to his
room. When Hsüeh-feng related what had happened to his fellow disciple Yen-
t’ou Ch’uan-huo, Yen-t’ou commented, “As great as Te-shan is, he has yet to
grasp the final word.” Upon learning what had been said, Te-shan sent an
attendant to summon Yen-t’ou and asked him, “Do you not approve of me?”
Yen-t’ou whispered to Te-shan what he had intended with his remark. Te-shan
remained silent. The following day, when Te-shan took the rostrum in the
lecture hall to preach the Dharma, his topic varied from his normal ones. Yen-
t’ou went to the front of the monk’s hall, clapped his hands, laughed heartily,
and proclaimed: “Shouldn’t he be congratulated? Te-shan has grasped the final
word. From now on, no one will be able to outdo him.” Wu-men’s perspective
is stated clearly in his opening comment: “Even if there were a final word,
neither Yen-t’ou nor Te-shan have seen it even in a dream.”75

Case 38, “A Buffalo Passes through the Window,” is conveyed in the Rinzai

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 233

tradition as an example that provides the three types of kōan together in a
single story. This kōan is based on a lecture given by Wu-tsu Fa-yen. Wu-tsu
said: “Suppose that you dreamed a water buffalo walked through the frame of
a window. Although the water buffalo’s head, horns, and four legs all pass
through, why does only the tail not?” In his verse, Wu-men states: “If the water
buffalo passes through, it falls into a ditch. If it turns back, it destroys the
window-frame. So, this tail is truly marvelous.”76

The subject of this kōan is unique, and said to be difficult. Because the
reviver of the Rinzai school in Japan, Hakuin Ekaku, counted it among the
eight most difficult kōan to penetrate, the great representative instructors of
the Rinzai school from the Meiji period down to the present also consider it
as one of the traditionally difficult kōan. The source for this episode involving
Wu-tsu comes from a story in chapter 22 of the Ta-p’an nieh-p’an ching, trans-
lated by Dharmaraksfia: “It is like a water buffalo that ravages a grain field when
someone has not protected it well. Ordinary people do not regulate the five
sense organs, are constantly involved with them, and endure many afflictions.
Good sons! Whenever bodhisattva-mahasattvas cultivate nirvana and practice
the way of the Sage (that is, Buddha), they are always well ordered, guarding
and regulating the five sense organs.”77

It was Inoue Shūten who first pointed out the source for the Wu-men kuan
episode.78 According to Inoue, it is based on a dream episode of King Ai-min
(Ch’i-li-chih), contained in the final chapter of the Fo-shuo chi ku-chang-che nü
te-tu yin-yüan ching, translated by Dinapala in the Northern Sung: “At that time,
King Ai-min unexpectedly had ten dreams during the night. In the first, he
dreamed that a large elephant passed through a window lattice; even though
the body [of the elephant] could get through, its tail could not.”79

Although there is definitely a difference in the story between the water
buffalo referred to by Wu-tsu and the elephant mentioned here, the basic con-
tent can be acknowledged as the same. As a result, other interpretations of the
kōan become possible. Inoue interprets this dream by King Ai-min in terms
of a problem for the Buddha, as supported by the following explanation from
the Fo-shuo chi ku-chang-che nü te-tu yin-yüan ching: “Even as the king dreamed
that a great elephant passed through a window lattice, its body passing through
but its tail not, after the Buddha enters nirvana, those he has bequeathed the
Dharma to, be they Brahmin, elders, laypeople, male or female, will discard
their relatives to leave home and study the Way (that is, Buddhism). It is as if
they were unable to liberate their minds from covetous attachment to fame
and wealth and customary habits, even though they have left home.”80

Acknowledging this as the source for the Wu-men kuan episode changes
the interpretation of Wu-tsu’s “tail.” When Wu-tsu refers to the “tail” remain-
ing, if it is meant to indicate that leaving home is not complete, since the mind
is covetously attached to fame and wealth and customary habits, the kōan may
be explained in terms of the impossibility of attaining true liberation. Based

234 the zen canon

on the Rinzai tradition, which counts this as one of its difficult kōan, “this tail
is a truly strange thing,” as stated by Wu-men, but if it is explained as Wu-tsu’s
admonishment of those who leave home without doing it thoroughly, is it
necessarily so difficult a kōan to penetrate?

I have introduced the three types of kōan in the Wu-men kuan according
to the Rinzai school. Because they are among the kōan used relatively often in
training practitioners and appear very challenging on the surface, they were
categorized by the tradition as intrinsically difficult to penetrate. However, it
seems to me that it is possible to question the compulsory way they have been
understood, based on new interpretations.

Special Features of the Wu-men kuan in the Context of Sung
Ch’an Textual History

In conclusion, I would like to consider the special features of the Wu-men kuan
within the context of the textual history of Sung Ch’an. My purpose here is to
explain the special features of the Wu-men kuan as compared to the Wu-teng
hui-yüan (The five lamps meeting at the source), a text compiled slightly later
than the Wu-men kuan. These two Ch’an texts belong to the two following
streams, A and B, based on their respective tendencies.

A. (Tsu-t’ang chi, chapter 20; 952) → Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu, 30 fascicles
(1004) → compilation of “ancient cases,” or kōan → Tsung-men t’ung-
yao chi, 10 fascicles (1093) → Wu-men kuan (1228)

B. Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu, 30 fascicles (1004) → T’ien-sheng kuang-teng
lu, 30 fascicles (1036) → Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng lu, 30 fasci-
cles (1101) → Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao, 30 fascicles (1183) → Chia-
t’ai p’u-teng lu, 30 fascicles (1202) → Wu-teng hui-yuan, 20 fascicles
(1252)

Stream B is generally referred to as leading to the compilation of the Wu-
teng hui-yuan. This is affirmed in the preface by Wang Yung, written in the
first year of k’ai-yu (1253):

During the ching-te era, the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu was publicly cir-
culated. Following it were the T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu, Tsung-men lien-
teng hui-yao, Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng lu, and Chia-t’ai p’u-
teng lu. Transmission of the lamp records appeared in succession;
separated by sect and divided by lineage, they originated based on
the same principals. Those who know these lamp records under-
stand their method as the means to destroy ignorance. Now, for con-
venience, the elder monk Hui-ming has collected five of the lamp
records into a single collection, calling it the Wu-teng hui-yuan.81

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 235

Regarding stream A, the reference to the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu is not to
all thirty fascicles but only to the latter half of fascicle 27.82 All the portions of
the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu other than the latter half of fascicle 27 belong in
stream B. Although it might be better to include the Tsu-t’ang chi in stream B,
it contains the genesis of the kōan genre in comments attributed to members
of the Hsüeh-feng faction.83 Moreover, since the Tsu-t’ang chi exerted hardly
any influence over the transmission of the lamp genre that continued following
the compilation of the Ching-te ch’uang-teng lu, we can consider that stream B
began with the compilation of the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu in 1004. As a result,
stream B can be said to have considerable significance for the investigation of
Sung dynasty Ch’an sources.

As an example of the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu contents, let us look at Ma-
tsu Tao-i’s record in fascicle 6. In the first place, it relates his record of activities
(hsing-ch’uang), and dialogues (wen-t’a), and ends by describing the events of
his passing. In contrast to this type of material, we find examples of comments
by Ch’an masters to kōan cases raised in various places at that time, recorded
in the latter half of fascicle 27. The story of “A Non-Buddhist Questions the
Buddha,” kōan number 32 in the Wu-men kuan, appears in the latter half of
fascicle 27. This section of fascicle 27 in due course established the styles of
“commemorating the ancients” (sung-ku) and “selections from the ancients”
(nien-ku), which are crucial methods of commentary in the evolution of the
kōan genre. Among the works in which these so-called kōans were collected
is the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi. Many of the “ancient cases” (ku-tse) selected for
inclusion among the forty-eight cases in the Wu-men kuan are taken from kōan
collected in the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.

On the other hand, how should we consider the Wu-teng hui-yüan in
stream B? As stated above, the Wu-teng hui-yüan indicates the five lamp rec-
ords, the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu, T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu, Chien-chung Ch-ing-
kuo hsü-teng lu, Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao, and Chia-t’ai p’u-teng lu, were com-
piled into one extensive lamp record. As a result, the two streams of Ch’an
texts in the Sung dynasty, not to mention the special features of Sung Ch’an
itself, are found in the different characteristics of the Wu-teng hui-yüan and the
Wu-men kuan, two Ch’an texts compiled at roughly the same time. In other
words, the Wu-men kuan is a kōan collection, and the Wu-teng hui-yüan may
be referred to for the most part as a historical work of the Ch’an school, tra-
ditionally called a “transmission of the lamp history” (teng-shih). Even among
the five lamp records, the Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng lu is divided into
five sections, “orthodox lineage” (cheng-tsung men), “responses in accordance
with practitioners’ abilities” (tui-ch’i men), “selecting the ancients” (nien-ku
men), “commemorating the ancients” (sung-ku men), and “gathas and verses”
(chieh-sung men), suggesting the appearance of stream A material in stream B
documents. The tendency reflected here in the Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng
lu emerged in the Northern Sung period, around the year 1100. In other words,

236 the zen canon

we can say that this tendency in the Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng lu reflects
the influences exerted on Ch’an in the period when the Tsung-men t’ung-yao
chi was compiled (1093).

The Wu-men kuan clearly possesses the features of a kōan collection in the
style of stream A. Moreover, it is possible to read a different intention for the
work into Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s comments in the story “Jui-yen Calls His Mas-
ter,” case number 12 in the Wu-men kuan, than what has been understood as
the special feature of the work up to now from looking at the first kōan, “Chao-
chou’s Dog.” Monk Jui-yen every day called out to himself “Master,” and re-
sponded, “yes.” Then he would say, “Stay wide awake?” and answer, “Yes, I
will.” “From now on, never be deceived by others.” “No, I will not.”

Wu-men’s comment:
“Old Jui-yen buys and sells himself. He plays around by displaying a
lot of spirit disguises and demon masks. Why? Take a look! One
calling out and one answering; one wide awake and one never to be
deceived. If you acknowledge any of these guises as real, you are
mistaken. If, on the other hand, you imitate Jui-yen, you have mas-
tered the perspective of the wild fox.
[Wu-men’s] verse:

Students of the Way do not understand the truth,
Clinging only to their former discriminating consciousness.
The basis for birth and death through endless eons,
Idiots refer to as their original self.84

In other words, the special feature of Ch’an is here regarded, on the one
hand, as a transformation engendered by “irrational dialogue” (muriewa), the
tendency to deny discrimination and rational understanding as harmful. But
on the other hand, doesn’t a religious aspect emerge embedded in this story?
As understood from Wu-men’s own record of activities, Wu-men achieved “a
thorough understanding of my one great event” (chi-shih yen-ming) through
the strict instruction of his master, Yüeh-lin. There is a religious aspect con-
tained in this, which involves the perilous nature of attaining spritual trans-
formation through “irrational dialogue.” Although the special character pos-
sessed by the Wu-men kuan highlights the perilous nature of irrationality, when
the text was transmitted to Japan it seems to have matched squarely the dis-
positions of the Japanese people, and has been read with very great frequency
down to the present day, mainly for its emphasis on irrationality.

If we understand the situation in this way, the special characteristics as-
sociated with the Wu-men kuan suggest very different qualities from those
associated with Dōgen’s style of Zen. The fact that either a yes or no response
was acceptable even in the one word Wu! is already contained in the Hung-

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 237

chih sung-ku. Dōgen adopted this approach in his Mana Shōbōgenzō, and even-
tually developed the position that either response was acceptable in detail in
the “Busshō” fascicle of the Shōbōgenzō. When compared to Dōgen’s Zen style,
the unique features of the Wu-men kuan seem rather distinct.

Why was the Wu-men kuan not read or published in China to the extent
that it was in Japan? Although there are uncertainties regarding the answer to
this question, it appears that texts other than the Wu-men kuan were sought
by Chinese students and practitioners, such the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi, from
stream A, or from stream B the Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao. Because the actual
compilation of the Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao is close to that of the Tsung-men
t’ung-yao chi, it may be preferable to place it in stream A.85 It seems that the
Wu-teng hui-yuan established stream B retrospectively by collecting five works
comprising 30 fascicles, and since the Ta-hui branch of Ch’an was the most
prominent movement, their main kōan collection, the Tsung-men lien-teng hui-
yao, was included. Moreover, the Ching-te ch’uan-teng lu, T’ien-sheng kuang-teng
lu, Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng lu, and Chia-t’ai p’u-teng lu are connected
as supplements to one another. The Ch’an adherents who compiled each of
these works formed them without duplicating what had been recorded previ-
ously. The fact that the Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao has characteristics closely
connected to kōan collections, which select materials from the Ching-te ch’uan-
teng lu, T’ien-sheng kuang-teng lu, and Chien-chung Ch-ing-kuo hsü-teng lu, has
already been pointed out. This makes it significantly different from the other
four transmission of the lamp records. As a result, even though the Tsung-men
lien-teng hui-yao was selected as one of the five lamp records in the Wu-teng
hui-yuan and included in stream B, it should be noted that in terms of each
characteristics as a Ch’an text, the Tsung-men lien-teng hui-yao follows the Tsung-
men t’ung-yao chi in stream A.

reference chart of the ch’an transmission lineage
Numbers indicate the kōan number where individuals in question appear in

the Wu-men kuan
Śākyamuni (6, 22, 32, 42)
Mahākāśyapa (6, 22)
Ānanda (22, 32)
twenty-five Indian patriarchs
Bodhidharma (41)
Hui-k’o (41)
Seng-ts’an
Tao-hsin
Hung-jen
Hui-neng (23, 29)

Nan-yang Hui-ch’ung
(17)

Ch’ing-yuan Hsing-ssu
(see Lineage A)

Nan-yüeh Huai-jang
(see Lineage B)

238 the zen canon

Lineage A
(Ch’ing-yuan Hsing-ssu)
Shih-t’ou Hsi-ch’ien
1. Yao-shan Wei-yen

Tao-Wu Yuan-chih Yun-yen
Shih-hsuang Ch’ing-chu Tung-shan Liang-chieh
Ch’ang-chuo Hsiu-tsai

(39)
Yüeh-chou Ch’i-feng

(48)
Ts’ao-shan Pen-chi (10)
Ch’ing-shui (10)

2. T’ien-huang Tao-Wu
Lung-t’an Ch’ung-hsin (28)
Te-shan Hsüan-chien (13, 28)

Yen-t’ou Ch’uan-huo (13) Hsüeh-feng I-ts’un (13)
Jui-yen Shih-yen (12) Hsüan-sha Shih-pei Yun-men Wen-yen (15,

16. 21, 39, 48)
Ti-tsang Kuei-shen Tung-shan Shou-ch’u

(15, 18)
Fa-yen Wen-i (26)

Lineage B
(Nan-yüeh Huai-jang)
Ma-tsu Tao-i (30, 33)
1. Ta-mei Fa-ch’ang (30)
T’ien-lung (3)
Chu-chih (3)
2. Pai-chang Huai-hai (2, 40)

Huang-po Hsi-yün (2) Kuei-shan Ling-yu (40)
Lin-chi I-hsüan
Hsing-hua Tsun-chiang

Hsiang-yen Chih-hsien
(5)

Yang-shan Hui-chi (25)
Nan-t’a Kuang-yung

Nan-yuan Hui-yung Pa-shao Hui-ch’ing
(44)

Feng-hsüeh Yen-shao
(24)

Hsing-yang Ch’ing-
jang (9)

Shou-shan Hsing-nien (43)
Fen-yang Shan-chao

Shih-hsuang Ch’u-yuan
Huang-lung Hui-nan Yang-chi Fang-hui

Pao-feng K’o-
wen

Hui-t’ang Tsu-
hsin

Pai-yün Shou-jui

Ts’ung-yüeh (47) Shih-hsin Wu-
hsin (39)

Wu-tsu Fa-yen (35, 36, 38, 45)
Yuan-Wu K’o-ch’in K’ai-fu Tao-ning

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 239

Hu-kuo Ching-
yuan

Hu-chiu Shao-
lung

Yueh-an Shan-
huo (8)

Huo-an Shih-t’i
(4)

Ying-an T’an-
hua

Ta-hung Tsu-
cheng

Mi-an Hsien-
chieh

Yueh-lin Shih-
kuan

Sung-yuan
Ch’ung-yen
(20)

Wu-men Hui-
k’ai

Shinchi Kaku-
shin (Japan)

3. Nan-ch’uan P’u-yuan (14, 19, 27, 34)
Ch’ang-sha Ching-sui (46) Chao-chou Ts’ung-shen (1, 7, 11, 14,

19, 31, 37)

notes

1. Translator’s note: The Wu-men kuan (J. Mumonkan) may be translated into En-
glish as The Gateless Barrier. For the sake of consistency, I have referred to the text
using the Chinese pronunciation, even in the Japanese context.

2. Ishikawa Rikizan, Zenshūsōden shiryō no kenkyū (Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 2001). Ini-
tially, Ishikawa reported on the “heresy incident” in “Zatsugaku jiken to kinsei buk-
kyō no seikaku” (The Heresy Incident and the Characteristics of Modern Buddhism),
Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 37 no. 1 (1988): 246–252; and “Bannan eishu to zatsu-
gaku jiken,” Sōtōshū kyōgi hōwa taikei 7 (1991): 378–384. Prior to this, there were stud-
ies of the “heresy incident” by Nakayama Jyōji, “Daigo kōroku jiken kō” (A considera-
tion of the Daigo kōroku incident), Sōtōshū kenkyū kiyō 11 (1979): 133–156; and by
Yoshida Dōkō, “Bannan eishu to zatsugaku jiken” (Bannan Eishu and the heresy inci-
dent), Eiheiji shi, vol. 2 (1982), pp. 723–738.

3. Translator’s note: This refers to the so-called kansansetsu, the term used by
Ishii here: Sōneiji in Chiba prefecture, Daichōji in Tochigi prefecture, and Ryōonji in
Saitama prefecture.

4. Other works, which were criticized included such texts for the study of kōan
cases as Daiendai, Ryōshūdai, Kenkokudai, and Zenrin ruiju.

5. ZZ 120.264c.
6. Iriya Yoshitaka, trans., Hekiganroku, 3 vols. (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1992,

1994, 1996).
7. Asahina Sōgen, trans., Hekiganroku, 3 vols. (Tokyo: Iwanami bunko, 1937).
8. Hirata Takashi, trans., Mumonkan (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1969).
9. Nishimura Eshin, trans., Mumonkan (Tokyo: Iwanami bunko, 1994).
10. Ishii Shūdō, “Shohyō: Nishimura Eshin yakuchū Mumonkan,” Hanazono

Daigaku bungakubu kiyō 28 (1996): 113–136.
11. Concerning Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi, see Ishii Shūdō, “Kung-an Ch’an and

the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi,” in Steven Heine and Dale S. Wright, eds., The Kōan:

240 the zen canon

Texts and Contexts in Zen Buddhism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000),
pp. 110–136. Here, I am particularly focusing on Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi in relation to
the Wu-men kuan.

12. Ibid., pp. 118–120. The Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi, previously difficult to obtain,
has been published along with the Yuan-dynasty text Hsü-chi tsung-men t’ung-yao, by
Yanagida Seizan and Shiina Kōyū in Zengaku tenseki sōkan (Tokyo: Rinsen shoten,
1999).

13. Ishii Shūdō, “Shūmon tōyōshū ni tsuite (jō) (ge),” Komazawa Daigaku bukkyō-
gakubu ronshū 4 (1972): 43–58, and 5 (1974): 37–63.

14. Even though Kagamishima Genryū’s Dōgen zenji to inyō kyōten, goroku no
kenkyū (Tokyo: Mokujisha, 1965), was a groundbreaking work in the study of the
sources that Dōgen relied on, the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi was not mentioned.

15. Shiina Kōyū, “Shūmon tōyōshū no shoshiteki kenkyū,” Komazawa Daigaku
bukkyōgakubu ronshū 18 (1987): 299–336.

16. Ishii, “Kung-an Ch’an and the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.”
17. Ishii Shūdō, “Shūmon tōyōshū to Hekiganroku,” Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū

46 no. 1 (1997): 215–221.
18. Ishii, “Kung-an Ch’an and the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi.”
19. The Tseng-chi hsü ch’uan-teng lu is contained in ZZ 142. The preface by Wen-

hsiu is dated the fifteenth year of yung-lo (1417). Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s biography is also
contained in Chien-chung ching-kuo hsü-teng lu, fasc. 35; Wu-teng hui-yuan hsü-lueh,
fasc. 2; Wu-teng yen-teng, fasc. 22; and Wu-teng ch’uan-shu, fasc. 53, among others.

20. Although Wu-tsu Fa-yen was an important figure in the history of Ch’an
during the Northern Sung, basic research regarding him remains to be carried out.
Regarding his biography, see Ishii Shūdō, “Goso Hōen no kenkyū no oboegaki,” (Ko-
mazawa Daigaku) Chūgoku busseki kenmon ki 8 (1987): 27–34.

21. Although san-t’ai is usually read as referring to a place, “on three stages.” I
take it here to be referring to the name of a song called “three stages.”

22. ZZ 142.390c.
23. Fujiyoshi Jikai, trans., Zenkan sokushin (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1970), p. 173.
24. The Yueh-lin Shih-kuan ch’an-shih yu-lu in one chapter, compiled by his at-

tendant, Fa-pao, etc. (ZZ 120).
25. ZZ 120.249Lb (left-sided leaf of pp. 249, column b).
26. The record of Wu-men Hui-k’ai’s career was written down by his attendants

P’u-ch’ing, P’u-t’ung, Liao-hsin, P’u-li, Fa-tzu, P’u-yen, P’u-chüeh, Kuang-tsu, and Yi-
chien in the Wu-men Hui-k’ai Ch’an-shih yu-lu, fasc. 2 (ZZ 120).

27. T 48.292b.
28. T 48.292b.
29. ZZ 120.242b.
30. Furuta Shōkin, trans., Mumonkan (Tokyo: Kadokawa shoten, 1959), p. 141.
31. Translator’s note: In rendering the titles of the kōan here, I have consulted

the English translations of Katsuki Sekida, Two Zen Classics: Mumonkan and Hekigan-
roku ([1977]; New York: Weatherhill, 1996.

32. Hirata Takashi, trans. Wu-men kuan (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1969).
33. The basic record for Shinichi Kakushin’s life is the Juhō kaisan hottō enmyō

kokushi gyōjitsu nenpu, compiled by Seikun, contained in Zokugunshoruijū 9A. Accord-

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 241

ing to the explanation of Chijiwa Minoru, there are records of Kakushin’s life re-
corded in the Juhō kaisan hottō enmyō kokushi tōmei by Seikan, and the Kōkoku kaisan
hottō enmyō kokushi tōmei by Unrin Shikei, and so on, housed in the National Diet
Library.

34. Zokugun shoruijū 9, pt. 1, pp. 351b–352a.
35. Ibid., p. 352a.
36. Kawase Kazuma, Gozanban no kenkyū (Nihon koshoseki shōkyōkai (Tokyo:

Antiquarian Booksellers Association of Japan, 1970).
37. Research clarifying the relation between the Hōttō faction and circumstances

in the Sōtō sect surrounding Keizan has been very active in recent years. There is a
series of studies on this topic by Satō Shūkō, “Kohō Kakumyō to Koken Chitotsu:
Rinzaishū Hōttō ha to Sōtōshū no hazama de,” Shūgaku kenkyū 37 (1995): 245–250;
and “Kyō Unryū to Kaga Daijō-ji: Keizan Jōkin to no kakawari wo megutte,” Shūgaku
kenkyū 39 (1997): 174–179.

38. Sugiō Genyū, “Minamoto Sanetomo no nyōssō kikaku to Dōgen zenji,” Shū-
gaku kenkyū 18 (1976): 41–46.

39. Zokugun shoruijū 9, pt. 1, p. 350a.
40. Sugio Genyū, “Dōgen zenji no Banshōkokkoku issai shūmetsu no shinjin

datsuraku to Asoka; amoji saihō: Shōgun Sanetomo no nōkotsu junbi kara staato
suru Dōgen Zen to Shōbōgenzō,” Shūgaku kenkyū 38 (1996): 7–12; and Sugio, “Aso-
kaōji ‘Useki ou’ hakken no igi: genzō kaishaku wa konponteki ni dou kawaruka,”
Shūgaku kenkyū 39 (1997): 19–24.

41. The Ch’an-tsung sung-ku lien-chu chi is a collection of kōan and verses (325
kōan and 2,100 verses) compiled by Fa-ying Pao-chien in the second year of ch’un-hsi
(1175). Later, in the Yuan dynasty, Lu-an P’u-hui added to it to form the Ch’an-tsung
sung-ku lien-chu t’ung-chi, a 40-fascicle work with 493 kōan and 3,050 verses. The fact
that the added portions included the Wu-men kuan indicates that it was one of the
influences. This expanded version is contained in vol. 115 of the Ming edition of the
supplementary canon, the Zokuzōkyō. Yanagida Seizan, in the “Kakukan shuroku sho-
moku kaisetsu” chapter of his Mumonkan shōsho shūsei, Zengaku tenseki sōkan 9 (To-
kyo: Rinsen shobō, 1999), indicates, “Translations [of the Wu-men kuan] have all been
done in Japan. The original text of the Wu-men kuan was transmitted to Japan early
on, owing to the fact that our own Shinchi Kakushin went to China and studied with
Wu-men. There is no evidence that it was read in China.” Moreover, according to the
comprehensive research on Chinese Zen sources by Shiina Kōyū in the Sōgenban
Zenseki no kenkyū (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha, 1993), there is no information whatso-
ever on Chinese editions of the Wu-men kuan.

42. Yanagida Seiji, Muromachi jidaigo shiryō toshite no shōmotsu kenkyū, 2 vols.
(Mushashino shoin, 1998), counts seventeen works on the Wu-men kuan compiled by
monks connected to the Sōtō sect. And, according to Yanagida’s “Kōzan-ji zō mumon-
kan shū ni tsuite” (included in the research report volume Kōzan-ji shozō no tenseki
bunsho no kenkyū narabi ni Kōzan-ji shiryō sōsho no henshū [Tokyo: Monbushō Kagaku-
kenkyūhi sōgo kenkyū, 1983], pp. 110–129), there have been 121 works on the Wu-men
kuan in Japan. The number of works by monks connected to the Sōtō sect would thus
seem to be fairly substantial.

43. Neither Kuroda Ryō, Chosen kyōsho kō (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1940) or Shi-

242 the zen canon

ina Kōyū, Sōgenban Zenseki no kenkyū contains any information on editions of the Wu-
men kuan published on the Korean peninsula. The thirty-fascicle Ch’an-men nien-sung
(contained in Kao-li ta-tsang-ching 46) was compiled by the Dharma heir of P’u-chao
Chih-ne, Yung-i Hui-ch’en (1178–1234), and his disciples, Chen-hsun, and so on, in
the fourteenth year of chen-yu (1226), two years prior to the Wu-men kuan. This work
selected 1,125 kōan for inclusion. Since it popularized the selected stories and verses
of Ch’an masters, it is conceivable that it rendered the reception of the Wu-men kuan
on the Korean peninsula unnecessary.

44. I have investigated this problem in detail in Ishii Shūdō, “Nenge mishō no
wa no seiritsu wo megutte” (Hirai Shun’ei hakushi koki kinen ronbun shu Sanron
kyōgaku to Bukkyō shoshisō (Tokyo: Shunjusha, 2000), pp. 411–430; and “Daibon tennō
monbutsu ketsugi kyō wo megutte,” Komazawa daigaku Bukkyō gakubu ronshū 31
(2000): 187–224. In addition, there is an article by Sugio Genyū, “Dōgen, Zeami,
Bashō, and Heidegger,” Yamaguchi Daigaku Kyōiku gakubu kenkyū ronsū 16 no. 1
(1967): 1–146, which considers the flower in terms of the world of beauty developed
in the Noh theater of Zeami. There is also a study by Onishi Ryōhō, “Zeami no hana
to Zenshisō,” Komazawa Tanki Daigaku bukkyō ronshu 6 (2000): 177–190, which
points to the story of the World-Honored One holding up a flower, and Mahākāśyapa
breaking into a smile, in terms of the ultimate meaning that the flower has.

45. T 48.293c.
46. See ZZ 1–87–4:303c, 326c, and 327b–c. Translator’s note: Ishii’s original

manuscript contained copies of the actual passages in question, following in the main
body of the text. These have been omitted in the translation, as being primarily the
concern of philological specialists. Those interested may consult the passages con-
tained in ZZ referred to above.

47. T 48.325b.
48. The argument that it was created by a Japanese person during the Edo pe-

riod was made by the Sōtō sect member Menzan Zuihō (1683–1769), in fascicle 1 of
his Daichi zenji geju monge (Zoku Sōtōshū zensho, “Explanatory Note 2,” pp. 242–243).
The same argument is made in two places by the Vinaya master of Tainin, Myōryō
(1705–1785), in Kōge zuihitsu, pt. 1 (32b–33a and 33a), as well as in the “apocryphal
scripture” (gikyō) entry in chapter 3 of Kōge dansū (Dai nihon zensho hon, p. 210).

49. Nukariya Kaiten, “Daibon tennō monbutsu ketsugi kyō ni tsuite” (contained in
Zengaku hihanron, Tokyo: Kōmeisha, 1905).

50. Contained in Yanagida Seizan, editor in chief, Zengaku sōsho no go (Tokyo:
Chūmon shuppansha, 1975), p. 369.

51. T’an-chou Hsing-hua yuan yu-lu, contained in Tz’u-ming Ch’an-shih Wu-hui chu-
ch’ih yu-lu compiled by Huang-lung Hui-nan (ZZ 120.88d). The Recorded Saying (yü-
lu) has a preface dated the fifth year of T’ien-sheng (1027).

52. Sung edition, 16b–17a. On the close connection between the Wu-men kuan
and the Tsung-men t’ung-yao chi, see the references to works by Ishii in notes 10 and
11.

53. T 48.295b. Translator’s note: Zenkei Shibayama, Zen Comments on the Mu-
monkan, (translated by Sumiko Kudō) (New York: Mentor, 1974), p. 145, and Sekida,
Two Zen Classics: Mumonkan and Hekiganroku, p. 73, were consulted for the transla-
tion.

the wu-men kuan (j. mumonkan) 243

54. Translator’s note: In addition to the meaning of “poem,” or “verse,” the word
ei in the title of the work can be translated as “looking at,” or “studying,” in which
case the title of the poem could be rendered “Looking at the original face.”

55. Kawamura Kōdō, ed., Shohon taikō: Eihei kaisan Dōgen zenji gyōjū-Kenzeiki
(Tokyo: Daishūkan shoten, 1975), p. 88. Translator’s note: I have taken the liberty of
omitting the technical, philological discussion of issues related to understanding Dō-
gen’s poem cited here, as being of little interest to the English reader.]

56. Kawabata Yasunari, Utsukushii Nihon no Watakushi, translated by Edward G.
Seidensticker, in Seidensticker, Japan, The Beautiful, and Myself (Tokyo: Kōdansha,
1969).

57. Funazu Yōko, “Sanshōdōeishū no meishū, seiritsu, seikaku,” Otsuma kokubun
5 (1974): 24–44.

58. Dōgen zenji zenshū (Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 1999), vol., p. 2
59. Wu-tsu fa-yen yu-lu (T 47.656b).
60. Yanagida, ed., Zengaku sōsho no go, p. 591.
61. There is also a citation of these words by Niu-t’ou Ching by Dōgen in his

fifty-first lecture in chapter 1 of the Eihei kōroku, in Ōkubo Dōshū, ed., Dōgen zenji
zenshū, (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1971) vol. 2, p. 18. This lecture was delivered when
Dōgen was forty-two years old.

62. Regarding Wu-tsu Fa-yen, see note 20.
63. T 47.665b–c.
64. T 47.869c.
65. Ta-hui’s Ch’an style is very different from the style of zazen encouraged by

Dōgen. See Ishii Shūdō, “Zazenshin kō,” Komazawa Daigaku Zen kenkyūjō nenpō 8
(1997): 37–72; and “Dai’e Sōkō no kanna zen to ‘Masen sakyō’ no wa,” Komazawa
Daigaku Zen kenkyūjō nenpō 9 (1998): 39–76.

66. T 48.292c–293a.
67. ZZ 120.260d.
68. Iriya Yoshitaka, “Zengo tsurezure,” contained in Gudō to etsuraku: Chūgoku

no Zen to shi (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1983).
69. Meichō fukyōkai, ed. Wanshi roku (Tokyo: 1988), p. 88.
70. Yanagida Seizan, “Muji no atosaki: sono tekisuto wo sakanoboru,” contained

in Zen to Nihon bunka (Tokyo: Kōdansha gakushū bunko, 1985); and Hirano Sōjō,
“Kusu mu Busshō no wa wo megutte” Zengaku kenkyū 62 (1983): 9–25.

71. Hirata, trans., Mumonkan.
72. Regarding the meaning of these three, see Iriya Yoshitaka and Koga Hide-

hiko, eds., Zengo jiten (Tokyo: Shibunkaku shuppan, 1991).
73. T 48.294c.
74. T 48.298b.
75. T 48.294b–c.
76. T 48.297c.
77. T 12.496a.
78. Inoue Shōten, Mumonkan no shin kenkyū, vol 2 (Tokyo: Hōbunkan, 1925).
79. T 2.852c.
80. T 2.853b.
81. Chung-hua shu-chu ed., p. 2.

244 the zen canon

82. See Ishii Shūdō, “Keitoku dentōroku maki 27 no tokushoku,” in Sōdai Zen-
shūshi no kenkyū (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha, 1987).

83. This is analyzed in detail in Yanagida Seizan, “Sodōshu no shiryō katchi,”
Zengaku kenkyū 44 (1953): 31–80.

84. T 48.294b. Translator’s note: Shibayama, Zen Comments on the Mumonkan,
p. 93, and Sekida, Two Zen Classics: Mumonkan and Hekiganroku, pp. 53, were con-
sulted in the translation.]

85. See Ishii Shūdō, “Daie sōkō to sono deshitachi (1): Gotō egen no seiritsu katei
to kanren shite” (Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 18/no. 2 [1970]: 332–333; “Shōmon rentō
eyō no rekishiteki seikaku,” ibid., 19 no. 2, (1971); and “Shōmon toyōshu ni tsuite (jō)
(ge),” Komazawa Daigaku bukkyō gakubu ronshu 4 and 5, 1973 and 1974. Translator’s
note: For a discussion in English, see Ishii’s “Kung-an Ch’an and the Tsung-men t’ung-
yao chi,” in Heine and Wright, eds., The Kōan, especially pp. 121–126.

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ zen 5 ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Hire a Writer

Client Reviews

4.9

Sitejabber

4.6

Trustpilot

4.8

Our Guarantees

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Money Back

If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

New to Your Trusted Assignment Help Service? Sign up & Save

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00

Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.

Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.

Order Now Order Now