Shōyōroku / Congrong lu · CASE 50
Seppō's “What Is It?”
The Book of Serenity
Banshō's pointer
Only with the final phrase does one first reach the secure barrier. Gantō was so self-assured that, above, he would not assent to his own teacher, and below, he would not defer to his Dharma brother. Did he forcibly create a complication, or was there another mechanism?
Case
When Seppō was living in a hermitage, two monks came to bow to him. Seeing them come, Seppō braced the hermitage door with one hand, thrust himself out, and said, “What is it?” One monk also said, “What is it?” Seppō lowered his head and returned to the hermitage. The monk later arrived at Gantō. Gantō asked, “Where have you come from?” The monk said, “From south of the ranges.” Gantō asked, “Did you ever visit Seppō?” The monk said, “I did.” Gantō asked, “What words did he have?” The monk recounted the preceding exchange. Gantō asked, “What did he say?” The monk said, “He had no words. He lowered his head and returned to the hermitage.” Gantō said, “Ah! At the time I regretted not telling him the final phrase.” “If I had told it to him, no one in the world could have done anything with old Seppō.” At the end of the summer retreat, the monk again raised the preceding story and asked for instruction. Gantō said, “Why did you not ask earlier?” The monk said, “I did not dare treat it lightly.” Gantō said, “Though Seppō and I were born from the same branch, we do not die from the same branch.” “If you want to know the final phrase, it is just this.”
Hongzhi's verse
Cut and file, carve and polish— transforming configurations, mingled error. The staff that became a dragon at Gebei— the Tao family's shuttle lying dormant— Those born from the same branch have their number. Those who die from the same branch are few. The final phrase is just this: a wind-driven boat carries the moon, floating on autumn water.
Footnotes 4
- Banshō's claims about Gantō's innate excellence, universal dominance, and mature inward cultivation are encomiastic judgments within the lineage record, not independently established descriptions of personality or historical influence. ↩
- Banshō reads the poem's elite political and ritual ideal into Zen formation. The historical identification and received exegesis belong to the classical commentary tradition; they do not make social rank a measure of realization. ↩
- “Double brightness and double darkness” points to paired disclosure and concealment in Caodong-style analysis. Its precise technical alignment with the relevant Biyan lu verse and commentary remains to be collated. ↩
- The bamboo staff and shuttle becoming dragons are literary legends. The first also uses a simulated hanging to explain Fei Changfang's disappearance, and the second begins with fishing and capture in a net; neither episode is presented here as an empirical report or practical instruction. ↩
About this version and its sources
- Full source citation
- Source title: 雪峯甚麼. Base: CBETA T2004, T48n2004_p0258c02–p0259a25. Angle brackets represent inline notes.
- Method
- Direct critical-edition translation from the cited received base text. Source claims, hagiography, uncertainty, and unresolved readings remain identified in the notes and project record.
- Editorial uncertainty
- Independent philological and reader review remain pending.
- Rights
- Project translation © Tulsa Zen Center Critical Edition contributors. Source text is cited by edition; redistribution policy requires final organizational approval.
- Revision identifier
- 6d5a2df4e44e
Banshō's commentary on the case
Ungan also studied with Dōgo; Seppō also studied with Gantō. A cultivated person is not ashamed to ask someone below him. Today Ungan's and Seppō's ways flourish greatly: this too is the remaining blessing of withdrawing oneself and yielding to another. Gantō, however, was outstanding by natural endowment. He raised and lowered Tokusan's Way and went unhindered throughout the world; no one dared face his edge. Because his seeing was penetrating and his inner cultivation fully matured, he could be like this.3 Look at that monk. At Seppō's gate, arrowheads met point to point. He too was a traveling practitioner. Why, then, did he remain doubtful about the final phrase all the way to the summer's end? Only because his eyes were dull and his head confused: he missed it face to face. Gantō explained a great many principles to him: “Seppō and I were born from the same branch, but we do not die from the same branch.” Though the one Dharma does not differ, among the three a difference appears. The monk and Seppō both said “What is it?” at the same moment. But when it came to discussing the final phrase, even after it was spoken to him he did not understand. Is this not differing by a hairsbreadth and missing by a thousand miles? Now say: did this monk truly not understand, or was he trying to set this story in circulation? Zhe of Isan said, “Great Seppō and Gantō were instead tested through by this monk.” Banshō says: A cold eye admits no defense. Gantō and Seppō may still be forgiven. But afterward Zhe also picked out Tokusan as one who did not understand the final phrase. That is truly difficult to accept. For this reason Tendō brings it out twice in verse. “Qi Ao” in the Mao recension of the Book of Odes praises the virtue of Duke Wu. He possessed cultivated accomplishment and could also listen to corrective remonstrance. Guarding himself through ritual, he was therefore able to enter service as a minister of Zhou. In praise of him, the poem was composed:4 Look at those bends of the Qi, green bamboo, luxuriant and fine. There is a refined gentleman, as though cut and filed, as though carved and polished. The commentary says: working bone is called cutting; ivory, filing; jade, carving; stone, polishing. Tokusan and Seppō gained Gantō, who clarified the final phrase. That this story has flourished down to the present is the power of cutting, polishing, penetrating, and transforming. Seppō is like the staff that became a dragon; this monk is like the shuttle lying dormant. Gantō pointed it out, but even now he does not know. This is why those who die from the same branch are few. Some say Gantō is like the dragon-transforming staff and Seppō like the dormant shuttle. Please examine the preceding story carefully. Setchō and Foguo used double brightness and double darkness to versify this story. One who has not investigated it thoroughly will not understand.5 The Biographies of Esoteric Arts in the History of the Later Han tells of Fei Changfang, a man of Runan who once served as a market official. He met the Master of the Gourd, who cut a green bamboo staff and made it appear that Changfang had hanged himself at home. Changfang then accompanied him into the deep mountains. Failing to complete his study of the Way, he took leave to return. The Master gave him a bamboo staff, which he rode home and then cast into the Gebei pond. Changfang threw the staff into the pond, where it transformed into a dragon and departed.6 Again, when Tao Kan of the Jin was young, he was fishing in Thunder Marsh. His net caught a shuttle. He hung it on the wall. Later, amid thunder and lightning, it transformed into a dragon and departed.6 Seppō is like the staff, this monk like the shuttle, and Gantō like a wind-driven boat carrying the moon. What is Banshō like? A Gong County tea bottle.