- As for the blog's name: -

I was @ Gustav Ericsson's sight, - Anzenkai, and I was looking at Nishijima Roshi’s calligraphies over there. Particularly there is one - "seki shin hen pen" - about which Gustav has earlier said in a blog post that it is Nishijima's favorite phrase from Master Dogen.

This seemed strange to me. It was not what I would expect Nishijima Roshi's favorite phrase to be. It seemed it could be some Rinzai master's favorite quote, - it seems to express continuous and constant sincerity, - but it did not seem to fit my view of the way Nishijima Roshi saw things.

So - consequently - I tried to think what would I expect his favorite quote to be. But all phrases I could think of did not seem to fit just what I might have had in mind.

So I tried to come up with what I would see it as, - and what I have come up with - is - "this universe out here".

- And this seems to be the right name for this blog here too.

- Definitely.                                                 ________________________

A Remark Regarding Egoism and Selfishness

Some people, as it seems, think selfishness and egoism are just two words for the same thing. I have not questioned but it seems this is the situation. What is supposed to be scientific research of the relevant fields is quite a joke, I am quite happy I am getting a chance to mention, - so I wouldn’t assume any relevant understanding might dawn there. Whether I am right or wrong as for my estimation in the first sentence here, - these are not just mere synonyms describing the same phenomenon itself but are referring to different, even if close, - phenomena.

Selfishness could exist at the absence of egoism, egoism could not exist at the absence of selfishness. In animals, where due to inabilities compared to humans what we call an “ego” could not come to be or be formed, egoism could of course not be traced or appear in the same way we find it in humans. - More simply said, - animals do not have an ego. Referring to something Steiner somewhere said, an animal could not say “I” to itself. - It could not view itself in this way, - obviously it does not have this ability, which we might say is the main thing differing animals from us, - not other points quite reknownly referred to randomly and repeatedly, - and therefore the element in our mind (we aim at undermining the root of on the spiritual path) subsequently rising as what we might imagine ourselves to be, - does not and would not appear in the form we know it ordinarily in the mind and consciousness of almost us all, and as I said animals therefore do not have this “ego” construction in their mental field, of course it could not appear without self consciousness.

This is all of course while those being lower than man could not at all, as a matter of principle, (and it doesn’t matter what exceptions one might or might not think of) exceed beyond the sphere of fundamental selfishness within which they are locked for life. Here may be the place to also remark that there is a fundamental difference between natural tendencies inherited and merely representing a choice of uncontrollable inclinations induced through the body and between true spirituality or the result of actual development representing some real revelation (even if not necessarily clearly evident) regarding the nature of selfishness and consideration. Some might argue that it is all the same and we are nothing more than fundamentally-the-same more advanced animals and that the idea of spirituality is in the first place some primitive thought humanity is better to rid itself of - and the sooner the better. I will not answer this or refer to it here but I might mention this post here you might check. - Anyway no one will argue that animals are not unable - fundamentally at least, - to go beyond selfishness. This is evident to all. - And what this post was trying to refer to is just the difference between the words (and subsequently of course the concepts) “selfishness” and “egoism”. The missing of the differentiation is a mistake, and to this small point I wanted to refer here.

Only at the existence of selfishness could the inner sphere within our mind representing one’s own interests and preferences come to be in the way it subsequently creates the more focused phenomenon you call egoism. (assuming you do) These things have to be seen. There is doubtly much point in just presenting words one is to intellectually refer to in an abstract manner. You have to see it for your self, and it doesn’t seem particularly difficult. You have to see what one phenomenon is and what the other phenomenon is. Otherwise this is to a great deal worthless. But still if some will see and others will following accept it is not devoid of value.

Anyway, this is not any great point, - this distinction is important, but only to some degree. I thought this post would come out much shorter, - but when writing it is sometimes, not necessarily rarely, - different. So far.

December 3, 2017. Will be posted when it does.


Today (10.12.17) I have understood the issue of the psycho-physical matter. The Reality is, roughly speaking perhaps, just mind. - But not self conscious of course, not this sort of doubled mind. You might say mindless mind perhaps. There is nothing of the sort of what we call matter, but the mind is clean, without any need for assurance or certification by some sort of extra checking as in what we are familiar with as self consciousness. - The appearance of matter, of any kind, spiritual too, - is as some sort of dream. It is nothing beyond that. It is real to us, that is to say it seems real to us, but it is nothing beyond some sort of dream, an illusion, - a phenomenon of the mind itself, or this mind itself, - nothing real beyond seeming only. This is possible because all is one. Considering us all, all beings, - different and separate entities - would quite clearly make this idea unreasonable. - But given that we are all one, that all is one, - it is possible that we all share the same dream. We are like different eyes (and other organs) of the same being, and therefore, and in this way, - it is not impossible and it does not negate common sense that we so share the same dream. Fundamentally. Our view is not identical of course, but we share the dwelling in the same swamp. I have thought of this dream idea before, but today I saw its relation to the psycho-physical issue, meaning that there is simply no matter, there never was, only what we might call the mental sphere, - though as I referred not in the way we are accustomed to it.

- This is why - subsequently, - the enlightened ones, - the Buddhas, those who have come to accomplish their potential as human beings, - say that the world does not exist. I have heard it before but I did not understand what was it they wanted to say. It was not clear to me whether it was true. - I did not understand what it was about, - what they meant. It raised no imaginative picture as to clarify the intention. I heard of delusion but never came across the above explanation. Now I understand, as it seems, what it is about. - Sawaki Roshi somewhere says we all live in a dream. He says where the discrepancies between the dreams occur or take place is where the trouble begins. This is also, as it seems, about this. I don’t remember his words exactly but they are off “Homeless Kodo” (Yadonashi Kodo Hokusan) where Uchiyama Roshi collected his sayings and referred to them.

I recall at Nishijima’s lectures in 1996 there was a time he used to say we think we are sitting there hearing his talk, we think we - including him, - are sitting or standing there - wherever it was - in Tokyo or in a temple or at his Dojo, - I don’t remember exactly the way he put it, - but that this is not so. I did not know what he was talking about, and I did not have any hope to understand (There and then, - at the time and place) what he was talking about, - so I paid no importance to it though I did not think it was untrue. I think he started it after talking about the teaching of Master Nagarjuna. - I only participated in one of his seshins. There and then was the first time he related to Nagarjuna’s teaching, as far as I remember. He spoke about negation of the world. And of affirmation of the Universe. - I didn’t quite understand what was the difference between “the world” and “the universe” but it seems it didn’t cross my mind asking him that.

“The universe” related to the original reality. That which Jesus calls “the Father”. This mindless mind I related to here above. - “The world" - as it seems, - was to indicate the phenomenal world as we see it, - delusion, - objects we perceive through the senses and subsequent interpretation. - I recall him giving the example of the tatami we were sitting on and the blackboard he was writing on. In this blog’s title - “This universe out here” - I was relating to the reality too in the same manner calling it “the universe”. - I used to capitalize “reality” when relating to this one incomparable distinguished reality, as to distinguish it from just the usual concept of reality (perhaps we should say pseudo reality) as us ignorant common humans relate to it normally in everyday life. But now I don’t. Not anymore.

Initially I started writing this in Hebrew. But then I (very quickly) came to write it in English. Perhaps it is significant that I am completing this post on Christmas. December 25 2017. Perhaps not. I’ll put it on on the 1st, of January that is. Perhaps I’ll get it off later and post it at a later date. The main issue is at the first paragraph. All the rest is just btw. So far.

Kalo’s Observation

Kalo says in one of his books (somewhere around 1988-1990) that bent teeth, teeth that are not strait, are an outcome of a faulted emotional-mental state or situation. - He somewhere mocks at the “bravery” of dentists aiming to redeem the situation by physical means. The reason I am writing this is that many, if not everyone, - can observe things and examine the question by themselves.

I have noticed examples of this more than once, and I generally might guess there might be some sort of correlation between the particular faults in one’s emotional structure (Kalo uses the word “array”, - in Hebrew of course) and the particular way in which the teeth grow not in the way or direction they should. - I never tried to particularly fit anything regarding and it doesn’t seem easy. - Still, the main thing is the main point: - The very existence of the principle. I cannot see any chance contemporary (so called) “science” would be able to come up with the way or mechanism by which this occurs. - For anyone sufficiently serious in the field of spirit it is - as it seems - inevitably clear that these “sciences” aiming at investigating the human soul, - while denying its existence, - are practically a joke. It is amazing the trust they receive from many, from a lot of people, from the majority of humanity I guess. - Anyway we could hope for nothing there, - regarding our issue. - Again, - I am not concerned - here in this post, - with the issue of which particular bent in which direction and in what point or area would be the result of which particular irregularity or wrongness in a person’s emotional array or system. - I am concerned with the hope that by personal observation readers of these-words-here will come to verify personally the phenomenon I am relating to really exists.

- First you might see one person where the link might seem reasonable or evident. - Then another person. And then another. - You can not calculate this or try to create some organized system by which the phenomenon could be examined free of the particular abilities of the observer. - You need to see. Wisdom, today, is being neglected to a great deal. Many can not tell the difference between wisdom and intelligence. Amazing perhaps. - Certain elements or factors within contemporary society implement the demand for “objective” testing. - This means as to be accepted things need to be able to be checked by some sort of mechanical system where wisdom will not be in need. If one person is able to see it and another is not it is not objective. Fuck the fools, but this is the way the world is going. - Anyway, - again, - back to our issue: - I’m saying you might first notice the phenomenon, still very questionable, - somewhere, and then notice it again, and then again. With time, gradually, (in most cases, as it seems to me) you can come to notice the general link as a continuous and ever present thing proving its own existence - though not in a very loud voice, - through people you see everywhere in general. Of course the phenomenon would not lack apparent exceptions, and would not be equally evident everywhere. - Where the things would be lighter, less impressive, less considerable, - where the matter would be of distortions that are closer to the common way, - the principle would not be as evident or noticeable as when dealing with worse irregularities. - But there is no hurry. There is no rush. - In Japan, as I recall, - the weight of the higher classes weighs on poor guys in the lower classes, due to the hierarchy of society, - and you can see that sometimes in the way peoples teeth are bent. I recall that, but it has been over 20 years since I have last been to Japan. I don’t know if anything might have changed.

So far for that. The main thing is for you to see. There is no need to go anywhere. - It is just about what you see anyway. You don’t need to conduct an experiment. And not every particular person will inevitably be able to prove to himself (or herself) what I am saying. Though I guess most will, it seems quite easy. As I said, - this is what brought me to write this here, - had it not been convincing (in that way) I would not see a point in writing it. Once the phenomenon is noticed it would point somewhere further, - but that is beyond me here. Let things be. The truth has a quality or a nature of being revealed, as it seems, - though in these strange days we seem to manage to get thing wrong in ways apparently unpredictable. Let this be all.


Regarding the time, -

(I wrote this on December 28th, I thought of the idea the day before, - I’ll schedule the post)

Let this be a New Year post.

Two Kinds of People

There are many ways of dividing people according to various ideas or characteristics into two or more kinds or groups and I am quite sure anyone interested in the field of spirit has generally heard or came across such things once or more than once sometime.

This here is one I have thought of sometime and have written about it to Nissim Amon by e-mail on May 9th 2016. - Now I thought it is appropriate to post here, at the blog. Now is October 20 2017, I am writing it on a “Word” file, and will add it to my currently stagnant blog when I get the chance.

The idea is simple: - Some people use words in one way, and some use them in another way, - regarding a certain point or issue: - I am not relating to everyday speech. - I am referring to when we need or choose to use more eloquent or elevated language. (In Hebrew we have a word “רהוט” or “רהוטה” but in English it doesn’t seem there is a word exactly matching it)

- In such occasions the difference I am referring to and writing about here exists: - Some people use the language and words in order to fit their need or aim: - In case such language is necessary for the expression of their ideas or message or structure-or-content-they-wish-to-display they would use it accordingly. That is to say when other more common everyday means of communication would practically not serve the aim in an appropriate manner.

This may be obvious but is not necessarily so. - The other kind consists of those who would rather use such language not in the same manner but in order to create a certain impression.

It is not a matter of sincerity. It is not that it does not reflect sincerity clearly and doubtlessly, - but it is not the issue I am intending for here. It is not the main point intended to be pointed at here, however sincerity in itself may be as important and as valuable as it may be. - It is a matter of a person’s capabilities. - Some just use the more serious-sounding language or the more apparently-impressive phrases and sentences in order to sound as they wish and appear to be what they most likely are not. It is true there are occasions which call - though never completely I suppose, - for a certain spirit and means or manner of communication, - but this is not generally what I am referring to and even there things would still be - somewhat at least, - according to what I am saying here. - But generally, - There are those who lack the true feeling or sensation for the language, - who are without the relevant sensitivity as to properly phrase themselves as to express rather refined or truly elevated notions or proposals or ideas - who might sound rather the same to many (otherwise this whole post would have been unnecessary or out of place) in speaking in different occasions or incidents, (and off dignified stages, no doubt) but are essentially different and are fundamentally pretentious even if unaware of it themselves.

Such is the idea I wanted to express here. I believe it of some value if it enables some to trace and/or to detect the true abilities of some intellectuals who may in general somewhat deceive many - even if quite innocently and unintentionally, - as to miss or fail to notice their real shallowness of mind and inability of observing reality as it is in sufficient depth as to come to satisfying conclusions which might lead us where we would aspire to go.

Nice language, isn’t it?


Get my point now?

Some serve the need, - and some imitate, ignorant of the true spirit, unaware this is what they are doing since they mistake empty intellectuality and mere external appearance for true understanding which might sometimes manifest itself in such capable means of expression and sometimes might not need to.

Fools, as a general rule, don’t know they are fools.

This is sometimes not a secret, but sometimes it is.

So far.

Seppō Gison (Xuefeng Yicun)

I am used to using Japanese names of the Chinese masters. Nishijima was generally always using the Japanese names. It might make more sense using the Chinese names if you are talking or writing in English, - but as for now at least I am continuing this way. Nishijima said this is the way Master Dogen would have pronounced them in front of a Japanese audience, - but it hardly seems to matter to me. Anyway, - I wrote “Seppo Gison” and added the Chinese name too.

I just want to bring four stories about him here.

All from the Shinji Shobogenzo.

I changed nothing of the translation, (else than two spelling mistake I came across) and left it exactly as it is. The translation is that of Gudo Nishijima, (- ?) and it says “Edited by” Michael Luetchford and Jeremy Pearson. - I don’t really like the translation this much. No offence to Mike or Jeremy, of course. - There is an earlier translation of Nishijima together with a person by the name of Larry Zacchi and with Luetchford too, - of Book 1 only.

- It seems better to me.

In cases where the translation was changed (as it was in some of the stories) it seems it wasn’t for the better. - It seems the principle guiding Leutchford and Pearson in the translation was to make it as comprehensible as possible. - At the price of the subtlety or refineness of the text as presented, - it does seem explicitly wrong to me. Particularly since there is anyway a commentary to each of the stories [there] where one can explain or present anything you’d consider might not be properly understood reading the text itself.

- Still, - this is the translation I use.

I don’t even know Daido’s translation, though I know Brad Warner didn’t like it. - However, - I don’t think it is very reasonable writing the commentary there that Daido did (as I understand) present there if one is not a Buddha. If one did not understand the last Dharma. And I don’t think he ever claimed to.

One other remark: - There used to a blog by Harry Bradely where all (or about all) of the Nishijima translation of the Shinji Shobogenzo was published, story be story. It is gone now, I don’t know if in any way having to do with a post of mine here from January 2012.

Anyway, here are the stories. This is what the post is about.

- Book 3, - no. 18 -

Three colleagues, Master Seppo Gison, Master Ganto Zenkatsu, and Master Kinzan Bunsui, visiting Buddhist masters throughout the country together, arrived at the Reishi district, where Master Kinzan had been appointed master of a temple. The two other masters travelled on and arrived at Gozan mountain, where they were stopped by snow. Master Ganto just slept all day. Master Seppo just practiced Zazen all day.

One day Master Seppo called to his friend and said: Brother monk, please get up for a bit.

Master Ganto said: what do you want to do?

Master Seppo said: Although I have been practicing Zazen for along time, I haven’t got a good state. When we were travelling with Reishu, I was constantly disturbed by him. Now we have to stop here. You brother monk, however, just sleep.

Master Ganto shouted at him and said: Just have a good sleep! You just sit on the floor all day, looking like a piece of ground in a remote village! Some day in the future when you become a temple master, you will intoxicate and mislead men and women.

Master Seppo pointed at his breast and said: In here I have not become peaceful. I cannot delude myself that it is not like that.

Master Ganto said: I just have the feeling that you will go to the top of a lonely peak in the future, build yourself a simple hut, and will spread and promote great teachings. You have these great capabilities, although you are still saying such things.

Master Seppo said: My state has not settled peacefully yet, though.

Master Ganto said: If you are really like that, tell me the facts according to the state you have experienced one by one. I will affirm those that are appropriate and scoop out what is not right for you.

Master Seppo said I: When I went to Master Enkan Sai-an’s temple I had the chance to hear the Master preaching Buddhist theory in the lecture hall. He preached about the material (form) and the immaterial (emptiness). There I was able to enter the concrete state.

Master Ganto said: That is already thirty years ago. I really want to discuss something more relevant.

Master Seppo said: Later, I read in Master Tozan’s poem of the flowering river, that if you look for something outside of yourself, that attitude can never make you happy. We should avoid making an effort to get something outside of ourselves. I hate that attitude. It is completely foreign to me.

Master Ganto said: If you understand the poem like that, you still haven’t got through that state.

Master Seppo said: Later, I visited Master Tokuzan and asked him whether or not I had got the result of what I had learned about Buddhism in the past. Master Tokuzan struck me once with his stick saying “What are you saying? At the moment of the present nothing remains. It is like water in a tub with no bottom.”

Master Ganto said loudly: Don’t you remember hearing that something which is always coming and going from the house can never be a family treasure? if you want to spread and strengthen the great teaching, they should emanate from your breast; using them, you should make yourself one with heaven and earth.

On hearing this, Master Seppo arrived at the truth, and prostrated himself at once. He stood up and cried repeatedly: Elder brother! I have realized the truth on Gozan mountain for the first time.

- Book 3, - no. 95 -

When Master Seppo Gison was taking a walk with Master Sansho Enen, they saw a group of monkeys. Master Seppo said: Each of those monkeys is carring an eternal mirror on its back.

Master Sansho said: The situation has remained unnamed for many eons. Why do you describe it with the words “eternal mirror”?

Master Seppo said: A crack has appeared!

Master Sansho said: You, reverend monk, with fifteen hundred students, cannot even recognize the meaning of the words.

Master Seppo said: I am too busy with my job as a temple master.

- Book 2, - no. 83 -

Near Mount Seppo there was a monk who lived in a hut that he had built. For many years this monk had not shaved his head. He made a wooden dipper for himself and would go to the side of the river, scoop the water into the dipper, and drink.

One day a monk visited him and asked: What was Master Bodhidharma’s intention in coming from the west?

The master of the hut said: The ravine is deep, so the handle of this dipper is long.

The monk went back to the temple and told Master Seppo of this.

Master Seppo said: Wondrous! I will go there myself and see the real situation of the old Master. I will know at once if he is genuine.

So one day Master Seppo, taking a razor, went to the hut with his servant monk, to visit the old man. They looked at each other for a while, then Master Seppo said: If you can say anything about the truth, I will not shave your head.

The master of the hut immediately washed his head with water. Then Master Seppo shaved his head for him.

- Book 3, - no. 84 -

One day Master Seppo Gison was asked by a monk: What is it like when we are in an eternal valley or a cold spring?

Master Seppo said: Even though we open our eyes widely, we cannot see the bottom.

The monk asked: What is it like when we drink it?

Master Seppo said: Water will not enter the mouth.

On hearing this story, Master Joshu Jushin said: Of course! Water will not enter the nostrils either!

Then a monk asked Master Joshu: What is it like when we are in an eternal or a cold spring?

Master Joshu said: It is painful!

The monk said: What’s it like when we drink it?

Master Joshu said: We will die.

When Master Seppo heard these words, he said: Master Joshu is an eternal Buddha.

After that time, Master Seppo didn’t engage in any discussions.


So far for this post.

As I said I don’t like that much the translation as it is, and it does seem to manifest somewhat in the stories I chose above - I am adding also Master Dogen’s referrences from the Shobogenzo (chapters Kokyō (20) and Dōtoku (39)) where he is talking about two (the 2nd and the 3rd) of the stories. These bits include also a translation, also by Nishijima, - here with Chodo (Mike) Cross, - which is different from the translation above. It seems in part at least the text itself is different in the Japanese too. - You don’t have to read it. But anyway still it is here. Depends on how interested you are.

First from Shōbōgenzō Kokyō, - relating to the second story here.

          Great Master Shinkaku of Seppō Mountain and Zen Master Enen of Sanshōin Temple are walking along when they see a group of apes. Thereupon Seppō says, “These apes are each backed with one eternal mirror.”
          We must diligently learn these words in practice. “Ape” means monkey. How are the apes that Seppō sees? We should ask questions like this, and make effort further, not noticing the passing of kalpas. “Each is backed with one eternal mirror”: though the eternal mirror is the face of Buddhist patriarchs, at the same time, the eternal mirror, even in the ascendant state, is the eternal mirror. That it backs each individual ape does not mean that there are big mirrors and small mirrors according to individual differences; it is “one eternal mirror.” As to the meaning of “backed,” for example we say that a painted image of a buddha is “backed” with what we stick behind it. When the backs of apes are backed, they are backed with the eternal mirror. “What kind of paste could have been used?” To speak tentatively, the backs of monkeys might be backed with the eternal mirror. Is the back of the eternal mirror backed with monkeys? The back of the eternal mirror is backed with the eternal mirror, and the backs of monkeys are backed with monkeys. The words that “each back has one face” are never an empty teaching: they are the truth expressed as the truth should be expressed. So apes or eternal mirrors? Ultimately, what can we say? Are we ourselves originally apes? Or are we other than apes? Who can we ask? Whether we are apes is beyond our knowledge and beyond the knowledge of others. Whether we are ourselves is beyond [intellectual] groping.
          Sanshō says, “It has been nameless for successive kalpas. Why would you express it as the eternal mirror?” This is a mirror, a concrete instance, with which Sanshō has certified his realization of the eternal mirror. “For successive kalpas” means before a mind or a moment of consciousness has ever appeared; it means the inside of a kalpa not having shown its head. “Nameless” describes “the successive kalpas’”sun-faces, moonfaces, and eternal mirror-faces; and describes the face of the clear mirror. When “the nameless” is really “the nameless,” the “successive kalpas” are never “successive kalpas.” Given that “the successive kalpas” are not “successive kalpas,” Sanshō’s expression cannot be an expression of the truth. Instead, “before a moment of consciousness has ever appeared” means today. We should train and polish without letting today pass in vain. Frankly, though the fame of this “nameless for successive kalpas” is heard on high, it expresses the eternal mirror as what? A dragon’s head with a snake’s tail!
          Seppō might now say to Sanshō, “The eternal mirror! The eternal mirror!” Seppō does not say that; what he says further is, “A flaw has appeared,” or in other words, “a scratch has emerged.” We are prone to think “how could a flaw appear on the eternal mirror?” At the same time, [in saying that] the eternal mirror has borne a flaw [Seppō] may be calling the expression “It has been nameless for successive kalpas” a flaw. The eternal mirror described by “a flaw has appeared” is the total eternal mirror. Sanshō has not got out of the cave of a flaw appearing on the eternal mirror, and so the understanding which he has expressed is utterly a flaw on the eternal mirror. This being so, we learn in practice that flaws appear even on the eternal mirror and that even [mirrors] on which flaws have appeared are the eternal mirror; this is learning the eternal mirror in practice.
          Sanshō says, “What is so deadly urgent that you are not conscious of the story?” The import of these words is “why [are you in] such a deadly hurry?” We should consider in detail and learn in practice whether this “deadly emergency” is [a matter of] today or tomorrow, the self or the external world, the whole universe in ten directions or [a concrete place] inside the great kingdom of Tang? As to the meaning of “story” in the words “You are not conscious of the story,” there are stories that have continued to be told, there are stories that have never been told, and there are stories that have already been told completely. Now, the truths which are in “the story” are being realized. Has the story itself, for example, realized the truth together with the earth and all sentient beings? It is never restored brocade. Therefore it is “not conscious”; it is the “nonconsciousness” of “the man facing the royal personage”; it is being face-to-face without consciousness of each other. It is not that there are no stories; it is just that the concrete situation is “beyond consciousness.” “Nonconsciousness” is red mind in every situation and, further, not-seeing with total clarity.
          Seppō says, “It is the old monk’s mistake.” Sometimes people say these words meaning “I expressed myself badly,” but [the words] need not be understood like that. “The old monk” means the old man who is master in his house; that is to say, [someone] who solely learns in practice the old monk himself, without learning anything else. Though he experiences a thousand changes and ten thousand transformations, heads of gods and faces of demons, what he learns in practice is just the old monk’s one move. Though he appears as a buddha and appears as a patriarch, at every moment and for ten thousand years, what he learns in practice is just the old monk’s one move. “Mistakes” are his “abundant jobs as temple master.” Upon reflection, Seppō is an outstanding member of [the order of] Tokusan, and Sanshō is an excellent disciple of Rinzai. Neither of the two venerable patriarchs is of humble ancestry: [Seppō] is a distant descendant of Seigen and [Sanshō] is a distant descendant of Nangaku. That they have been dwelling in and retaining the eternal mirror is [evidenced] as described above. They may be a criterion for students of later ages.

Second from Shōbōgenzō Dōtoku, - relating to the third story here

          In the order of Great Master Shinkaku of Seppō there was a monk who went to the edge of the mountain and, tying together thatch, built a hut. Years went by, but he did not shave his head. Who can know what vitality there was inside the hut?—though circumstances in the mountains were desolate indeed. He made himself a wooden dipper and he would go to the edge of a ravine to scoop water and drink. Truly, he must have been the sort who drinks the ravines. As the days and months came and went like this, rumors of his customs secretly leaked out. Consequently, on one occasion a monk came to ask the master of the hut, “What is the ancestral master’s in tention in coming from the west?” The hut master said, “The ravine is deep so the dipper’s handle is long.” The monk was staggered. Without doing prostrations or requesting the benefit [of further teaching], he climbed back up the mountain and told Seppō what had happened. When Seppō heard the report he said, “Wondrous! Even so, this old monk will have to go and see for himself. By testing [the hut master] I will grasp [his situation] at once.” Seppō’s words mean that the excellence [of the hut master’s expres sion] is so excellent as to be wondrous, but the Old Monk himself had better go and investigate.
          So it is that one day Seppō suddenly sets off, telling an attendant monk to bring a razor. They go directly to the hut. As soon as he sees the hut master, [Seppō] requests, “Express the truth and I will not shave your head.” We must understand this request. “Express the truth and I will not shave your head” seems to say that not to have the head shaved would be to have expressed the truth—What do you think? If this expression of the truth is an expression of the truth, [the hut master] might finally go unshaved. Those who have the power to hear this expression of the truth should listen, and should proclaim it to others who have the power to hear. Then the hut master washes his head and comes before Seppō. Has he come as the expression of the truth, or has he come as the nonexpression of the truth? Seppō shaves the head of the hut master at once.
          This episode is truly like an appearance of the uḍumbara. It is not only difficult to meet, it may be difficult even to hear. It is beyond the scope of [bodhisattvas in] the seven sacred stages or ten sacred stages and is not glimpsed by [bodhisattvas in] the three clever stages or seven clever stages. Sutra teachers and commentary teachers, and adherents of mystical powers and apparitions, cannot fathom it at all. “To meet the Buddha’s appearance in the world” means to hear a story like this. Now, what might be the meaning of Seppō’s “Express the truth and I will not shave your head.” When people who have never expressed the truth hear this, those with ability may be startled and doubting and those without ability will be dumbfounded. [Seppō] does not ask about “buddha,” he does not discuss “the Way,” he does not ask about “samādhi,” and he does not discuss “dhāraṇī.” Inquiry like his, while seeming to be a request, also seems to be an assertion. We should research this in detail. The hut master, though, because of his genuineness, is aided and abetted by the expression of the truth itself and is not dumb founded. Showing the traditional style, he washes his head and comes for ward. This is a Dharma standard at which not even the Buddha’s own wisdom can arrive. It may be described as “manifestation of the body,” as “preaching of the Dharma,” as “saving of the living,” and as “washing the head and coming forward.” Then, if Seppō were not the real person he is, he might throw down the razor and roar with laughter. But because Seppō has real power and is a real person, he just shaves the hut master’s head at once. Truly, if Seppō and the hut master were not “buddhas alone, together with buddhas,” it could not be like this. If they were not one buddha and two buddhas, it could not be like this. If they were not a dragon and a dragon, it could not be like this. The black dragon’s pearl is tirelessly guarded by the black dragon, but it rolls naturally into the hand of a person who knows how to take it. Let us remember: Seppō testing the hut master, the hut master seeing Seppō, expression of the truth, nonexpression of the truth, [the hut master] having his head shaved, and [Seppō] shaving his head. So, in conclusion, there are ways for good friends in the expression of the truth to pay unexpected visits. And between friends who are unable to say anything, although they do not expect [recognition], the means are already present for their selves to be known. When there is learning in practice of knowing the self, there is the reality of expressing the truth.

I droped the footnotes. The links for the full books are on the right and anyone intersted can check there.