--- In [email protected], "ryhorikawa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>...snip...
> "Mu" ... "koans".. I guess it really comes down to how each of us
answers the
> question "What is Zen?"...
I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.
When I use the term `zen' I use it to describe a METHOD or SET OF
ACTIVITIES useful for realizing Buddha Nature. From what you've
posted previously I believe you (and most others on this forum that
responded to `What is Zen?') use the term `zen' to refer to both a
METHOD of realizing and as a METAPHOR for the STATE of realization
of Buddha Nature. To me `zen' as a METHOD ends with the realization
of Buddha Nature. By this I don't mean that you cease sitting or
chanting or bowing, or whatever it is you do; but that you no longer
PRACTICE ZEN, you only `chop wood' or `carry water'.
>...snip...From where I'm standing (and again it is without doubt a
flawed
> "place"), koans - for someone like me - have "outcomes" but I'm
not sure I
> "agree" with you, Bill, that koans "definitely have
answers/responses"...snip...
> If pressed to articulate what I think is the outcome of koans,
clearly, for me, it
> comes around to "What is Zen?" And so, as I said in a previous
post: Zen is
> the "erasing" of the boundaries between the "transcendent" and the
> "phenomenal" in whatever way we "chop our wood" and "carry our
water" ...
> AND where every "act"/action (i.e., every aspect of our "chopping
of wood"
> and "carrying of water") works to alleviate the suffering of all
sentient and
> non-sentient beings. Flawed as it is, this is the nature of my Zen
journey...
I think the difference in our opinion here is related to the
difference of the way we use the term `zen'.
As a METHOD, koans are used by zen teachers to assist students
realize Buddha Nature. (There is another thread starting that looks
like it will deal with questions surrounding satori, enlightenment,
degrees of enlightenment, etc
, so I won't discuss that here.) In
this respect there are definitely valid and invalid
answers/responses. A zen teacher's role in the zen method is to
guide you in resolving the koan and to validate/invalidate your
answer/response. Mu, as I'm sure you are aware, is a special class
of koan used to first afford a glimpse of Buddha Nature. Included
among this class (breakthrough) are the koans `What is the sound of
one hand clapping?' and `Show me (What is/was
) your face before
your parent's were born!' In order to `pass' the koan Mu you must
demonstrate to your teacher that you have experienced Buddha
Nature. How you do that is up to you.
If you're using the term `zen' as a STATE, then I'd agree with you
that koans would have `outcomes'; but I don't use the term that way
so I'll leave it at that.
> As a sidenote, in the "Chao-chou-ta-shih-yu-lu" where the
Joshu's "Mu" koan
> appears, Joshu (or Chao-chou in Chinese) has three responses to
the
> question as to whether a dog possesses Buddha-nature:
1) "Mu"/'nai" ; 2) "U"/
> "aru" and 3)no response at all - only silence
>
> The first response is the one most people have heard and in
English "mu" is
> commonly translated as "no".
>
> On a totally petty and technical note, Bill, I lovingly disagree
with you that
> "Linguistically the Japanese word 'mu' just means 'no'..." The
character "mu"
> is held up in many circles as a classic example of what Japanese
call "aimai
> kotoba" or "ambiguous language". Unlike Chinese in which each
character
> has only one pronunciation, Japanese characters usually have
several ... In
> the case of "mu", the character can be pronounced several ways in
which
> "mu" is just one. ... And, in terms of meaning, there are
differences in nuances
> between the pronunciations. If the "answer" to the koan was
intended
> "simply" to be "NO", the Japanese Zen commentators would
undoubtedly
> have indicated this nuance by pronouncing the character not
as "mu" but as
> "nai". But it is clear that the prounciation is not "nai"
but "mu".
>
> I think there is "intentionality" in the use of the
pronunciation "mu" and that
> intentionality is a nod (or finger pointing) towards "emptiness".
For me, what
> works is saying that Joshu responded "Empty!" (rather than "nai"
or "NO!") -
> or "Form!" (rather than "aru" or "YES!" )to the question as to
whether a dog
> possesses Buddha-nature.
>
> In any event, this linguistic pairing of "Mu" (--> emptiness)
and "U" (--> form) is
> what I think Frank was getting at in his really well written post
on the non-
> duality of form and emptiness. (Frank, forgive me if I am
misrepresenting your
> position) If it is, then isn't this the metaphorical "context"
in which the
> Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara (the personification of unconditional
compassion
> for the suffering of all sentient beings) delivers the "Heart
Sutra"?
Thanks for this sidenote and the technical note. I think I've heard
the multiple responses to the Koan somewhere before. These
different responses make for interesting discussion points, and the
first two certainly illustrate the powerful poetic qualities of the
Japanese language. Joshu (Chao-Chou) is depicted as a powerful
teacher so I'm sure he chose his response very carefully to both
instruct and challenge his student. In that respect the multiple
aspects of `Mu' that can encompass `no', `yes' and `emptiness' all
at once make it a wonderful response. Can the same be said for the
Chinese `Wu'?
As an aside I'd like to add that I've often thought another possible
attempt to come up with an English equivalent to `Mu' might
be `moot', but that doesn't encompass all the nuances that you've
ascribed to `Mu'.
In the end the entomology of `Mu' is not important to the koan, but
it sure is interesting!
> Struggling in the Dharma :-),
> ryhorikawa
No stuggle, no dharma ;-{
...Bill!
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Click here to rescue a little child from a life of poverty.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/rAWabB/gYnLAA/i1hLAA/S27xlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Current Book Discussion: Appreciate Your Life by Taizan Maezumi Roshi
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZenForum/
<*> 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/
