Edgar, That might be true if the man from whose skull he drank had died of some communicable disease, but as you well know that's not the point of the story.
The point of the story is that when Won Hyo was not able to completely engage his rational mind (because of the lack of information caused by the darkness) the experience of the water was refreshing. In the morning when he was able to fully engage his rational mind the perception of his having drank from the skull was nauseating. The story points out the difference between experience and perception, the difference between Buddha Nature (experience) and rationalization (thought). Won Hyo's conclusion was: "Ah, he said to himself, thinking makes good and bad, life and death. And without thinking these is no universe, no Buddha, no Dharma. All is one, and this one is empty." ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Bill, > > LOL! And then Won Hyo died of whatever had killed the guy who's skull he > drank out of. > > Why? Because he was a comic book Zennist who didn't have enough sense to use > his RATIONAL MIND! > > Edgar > > > > On May 18, 2013, at 12:39 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > Mike, > > > > And what I am saying (and IMO) is perception should NOT be used to > > illustrate Buddha Nature. > > > > Perceptions are creations of the intellect (Human Nature). > > > > [The awareness of sensual]experience is Buddha Nature. (The qualifiers in > > [brackets] should be unnecessary but I know many do not share my definition > > of 'experience'.) > > > > Here is another zen story that I think I posted just recently that perhaps > > better illustrates my point: > > > > "This is a story about Won Hyo, who is a famous Korean monk. He wanted to > > travel to China to meet a master that would teach him Buddhism. > > > > One evening as Won Hyo was crossing the desert, he stopped at a small patch > > of green, where there were a few trees and some water, and went to sleep. > > Towards midnight he awoke, thirsty--it was pitch-dark. He groped along on > > all fours, searching for water. At last his hand touched a cup on the > > ground. He picked it up and drank. Ah, how delicious! Then he bowed deeply, > > in gratitude, to the Buddha for the gift of water. The next morning, Won > > Hyo woke up and saw besides him what he had taken for a cup (during the > > night). It was a shattered skull, blood-caked and with shreds of flesh > > still stuck to the cheek-bones. Strange insects crawled or floated on the > > surface of the filthy rainwater inside it. Won Hyo looked at the skull and > > felt a great wave of nausea. He opened his mouth. As soon as the vomit > > poured out, his mind opened and he understood. Last night, since he hadn't > > seen and hadn't thought, the water was delicious. This morning, seeing and > > thinking had made him vomit. Ah, he said to himself, thinking makes good > > and bad, life and death. And without thinking these is no universe, no > > Buddha, no Dharma. All is one, and this one is empty. There was no need now > > to find a master. Won Hyo already understood life and death. What more was > > there to learn? So he turned and started back across the desert to Korea." > > > > -From the book entitled, "Thousand Peaks" by Mu Soeng Sunim > > > > Now, IMO Buddha Nature is pure experience, like Won Hyo's experience of > > drinking the water. It would be like the 'Ah!' I recommended in the > > strawberry story. Both his initial perception of 'delicious' and his later > > perception which caused him to be nauseous is like the 'sweet' exclamation > > in the strawberry story. > > > > So unless you want to interpret 'sweet' to just be a spontaneous, > > non-judgmental exclamation IMO it is not an appropriate representation of > > Buddha Nature. I'd also think that is shown by all the confusion and dialog > > it has caused on just this thread. > > > > But, as usual, all this is CAVEAT EMPTOR and IMO only...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], uerusuboyo@ wrote: > > > > > > Bill!,<br/><br/>You could well be correct about the story not being used > > > as a recognised koan. But I'm sure I've come across it being used as such > > > a couple of times. <br/><br/>I can see how "Ah!" could be used as you > > > say, but it isn't. The point I'm arguing here is that in the story - a > > > Zen teaching 'device'- a perception was used by the man to illustrate > > > Buddha Nature. The man didn't just say "Sweet!" as a passive description > > > - he exclaimed his perception > > > positively.<br/><br/>Mike<br/><br/><br/>Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
