I post koan, you answer
A koan is a short story about the interaction between zen masters and their disciples, that's usually not easy to understand.
Some time ago I posted out of the gateless gate by wumen, this time we will use the blue cliff record by yuanwu.
I'll have to leave out the commentary though, since yuanwu talked alot more than wumen and the comments are just too long.
Let's start easy.
This is Case 52: Chao Chou Lets Asses Cross, Lets Horses Cross
A monk asked Chao Chou, "For a long time I've heard of the
stone bridge of Chao Chou, but now that I've come here I just
see a simple log bridge."
Chou said, "You just see the log bridge; you don't see the
stone bridge."
The monk said, "What is the stone bridge?"
Chou said, "It lets asses cross, it lets horses cross."
Chao Chou was a zen master who has pretty famous for putting sandals on his head, but also for telling monks to eat their rice and clean their bowls.
So, What is the stone bridge /his/? Chao Chou already said it all.
Some background of Chao Chou's lineage in pic related.
Chao Chou is also written as Zhaozhou or Joshu.
Also noteworthy is Linji, (jap. Rinzai) who basically founded modern Rinzai zen, also modern guys deviate a lot from his teachings.
A log bridge is as good as a stone bridge for letting animals cross?
>>1141787
Is that a question or your try at answering?
Some more background:
Zen masters were often named after the places where they lived.
Since the masters names often had an interesting meaning or funny titles, these koans sometimes use these meanings as puns.
E.g. Huang Po was named after Mount Huang Po, the mountain where his monastery was.
I'd assume Chao Chou was a town or at least the name of some place known for it's awesome stone bridge.
The monk is obviously not talking about that bridge though, but using it as a metaphor.
>>1141908
So the thing is that the monk is being insulting by saying the master is just a log bridge rather than a stone bridge? Assuming horses and donkeys have similar cultural associations, Chou is saying that even though he appears to be just a log bridge, in reality he can support "horses" (the unstubborn) and "donkeys" (the stubborn, including the monk)?
>>1141952
>So the thing is that the monk is being insulting by saying the master is just a log bridge rather than a stone bridge?
exactly
>Chou is saying that even though he appears to be just a log bridge, in reality he can support "horses" (the unstubborn) and "donkeys" (the stubborn, including the monk)?
Chao Chou also quotes Sengcan in another koan saying "The great way is without difficulty, just avoid picking and choosing."
Chao Chou let's asses and horses cross, he doesn't pick and choose.
In that way, the stone bridge is a metaphor for his "ordinary mind" which is beyond picking and choosing, but which the monk can't see.
I like your answer, let's go for the next koan.
This seems a little harder, but also more interesting
Case 53: Pai Chang's Wild Ducks
Once when Great Master Ma and Pai Chang were walking
together they saw some wild ducks fly by. The Great Master
asked, "What is that?" Chang said, "Wild ducks." The Great
Master said, "Where have they gone? " Chang said, "They've
flown away." The Great Master then twisted Pai Chang's
nose. Chang cried out in pain. The Great Master said, "When
have they ever flown away?"
>>1142029
some excerpts from yuanwu's commentary:
If you observe this case with the correct eye, unexpectedly it's
Pai Chang who has the correct basis, whereas Great Master Ma
is creating waves where there is no wind. If all of you want to
be teachers of Buddhas and Patriarchs, then study Pai Chang. If
you want to be unable to save even yourselves, then study the
Great Master Ma. Observe how those Ancients were never ab
sent from Here, twenty-four hours a day.
When teachers of our school help people, they must make
them penetrate through. You see that Pai Chang didn't under
stand, that he didn't avoid cutting his hand on the point. Ma
Tsu just wanted to make him understand this matter. Thus it
is said, "When you understand, you can make use of it wher
ever you are; if you don't understand, then the conventional
truth prevails." If Ma Tsu hadn't twisted Pai Chang's nose at
that time, the conventional truth would have prevailed. It's
also necessary when encountering circumstances and meeting
conditions to turn them around and return them to oneself
>>1142029
The most obvious answer seems to be that the ducks do not, from their own perspective, fly "away", but "towards." But that would seem to be a bit silly, since they clearly fly away from threats. So maybe the solution here is to throw out the here/there distinction entirely, which by extension removes the concept of "away" entirely?
>>1142029
"Great Master" is full of shit, and just acting irrationally and talking nonsense to seem like a deep and insightful zen master.
I suspect that zen Buddhism is just a prank that went way too far, and that the only enlightenment that is to be reached is to recognize it at such.
>>1142092
yes this is good.
There being ducks and the ducks flying away is conventional truth.
Master Ma was pointing beyond conventional truth, beyond the distinction of here/there, as you said.
Also interesting, another master has written a verse on this koan and in it he says:
Pai Chang wanted to fly away, but Ma Tsu held him fast.
So the distinction between Pai Chang and the ducks is another dimension of the koan.
It's a distinction that Pai Chang made, but Ma Tsu didn't seem to like that, twisting his nose to pull him back from his conceptual dualistic thinking, keeping him from flying away.
Since there is no distinction bewteen Pai Chang and the ducks, the ducks can't fly away, because Pai Chang is still here.
How did Ma Tsu create waves where there is no wind, as yuanwu put it, though?
>>1142203
That's closer to the truth than many people want to believe it is.
When Lin Chi finally understood his Master Huang Po and got enlightened, what he said was:
"Now I get it, there is nothing to Huang Po's Zen after all"
(not looking that up right now, the wording was probably a little different)
And the buddha himself is sometimes qouted as "I've truly gained nothing from complete, unexcelled enlightenment"
This "enlightenment" is certainly a lot less mystical than most people believe it is.
>>1142203
>>1142269
Different cultural context, but that reminds me of something.
>Nasreddin was walking in the bazaar with a large group of followers. Whatever Nasreddin did, his followers immediately copied. Every few steps Nasreddin would stop and shake his hands in the air, touch his feet and jump up yelling "Hu Hu Hu!". So his followers would also stop and do exactly the same thing.
>One of the merchants, who knew Nasreddin, quietly asked him: "What are you doing my old friend? Why are these people imitating you?"
>"I have become a Sufi Sheikh," replied Nasreddin. "These are my Murids [spiritual seekers]; I am helping them reach enlightenment!"
>"How do you know when they reach enlightenment?"
>"That’s the easy part! Every morning I count them. The ones who have left – have reached enlightenment!"
>>1142203
It reminds me of a sort of joke I learned ten years ago. It doesn't work in English, or maybe it could be adapted, but I'll just translate directly.
>It's three dwarves.
>They're going to their mine.
>They take the path across the woods, because it's quicker.
>On the way they sing their going-to-work song.
>The first dwarf takes the pickaxe.
>The second one takes the shovel.
>What does the third take ?
>No, not that.
>Can't find ?
>No it's not that.
>It's easy though. Listen well.
>It's three dwarves. They're going through the woods. It's the quickest way to their mine, where they are heading to.
>They're singing the song they usually sing on the way.
>The first takes the pickaxe, the second the shovel. What does the third dwarf take ?
Keep saying no to whatever tool or object they can think of. Repeat the story, again and again, as if there was a hint to the answer in it. Tell them (it works better with groups) that it's simple.
The thing ends when someone gets annoyed enough and runs out of patience and then finds the answer :
>That fucking dwarf takes heads ! Oh... Wait.
As "something takes [my] head" means it's very boring/frustrating/annoying in my language.
>>1142092
>So maybe the solution here is to throw out the here/there distinction entirely, which by extension removes the concept of "away" entirely?
Yes, all places are one place, it's just that that place is very, very large.
>>1142464
What is your language?
>>1142511
So what?
>>1142556
So we need signposts, maps etc. Occasionally we need to ask for directions.
>>1142591
Well obviously.
So what?
>>1142769
So you're a little prickly and defensive and as a result can't identify light-hearted funposting.
If you immediately know that the candlelight is fire, then the meal was cooked long ago.
>>1142029
This is actually an early conception of the principles of quantum mechanics. All objects in the universe are superpositions of states that they can actualize by properties that they can potentially have, and the wild ducks are no different. The wild ducks are at all times some superposition of the state "flying" and "not flying", similarly men are always some superposition of the state "seeing the duck flying" and "not seeing the duck flying", and as such there is no sense in saying whether the wild ducks have ever flown, are flying or wille ver fly.
>>1142533
He's french probably, i used to hate this story
>>1141777
>Any sufficiently advanced riddle is indistinguishable from gibberish
>>1142875
Case 57:
A monk asked Chao Chou, " 'The Ultimate Path has no
difficulties-just avoid picking and choosing.' What is not
picking and choosing?"
Chou said, "'In the heavens and on earth I alone am the
Honored One.'"
The monk said, "This is still picking and choosing."
Chou said, "Stupid oaf! Where is the picking and choosing?"
The monk was speechless.
Background:
Chao Chou is quoting Sengcan's xinxin ming (faith in mind) here.
This is the xinxin ming's 1st verse:
The Supreme Way is not difficult
If only you do not pick and choose.
Neither love nor hate,
And you will clearly understand.
Be off by a hair,
And you are as far apart as heaven from earth.
If you want it to appear,
Be neither for nor against.
For and against opposing each other –
This is the mind’s disease.
Without recognising the mysterious principle
It is useless to practice quietude.
>>1142966
>No, ducks are not in superposition.
>>1142942
Because he didn't pick or choose the title Honored one, but it was bestowed upon him?
this one is my favorite:
Once when Hyakujo delivered some Zen lectures an old man attended them, unseen by the monks. At the end of each talk when the monks left so did he. But one day he remained after the had gone, and Hyakujo asked him: `Who are you?'
The old man replied: `I am not a human being, but I was a human being when the Kashapa Buddha preached in this world. I was a Zen master and lived on this mountain. At that time one of my students asked me whether the enlightened man is subject to the law of causation. I answered him: "The enlightened man is not subject to the law of causation." For this answer evidencing a clinging to absoluteness I became a fox for five hundred rebirths, and I am still a fox. Will you save me from this condition with your Zen words and let me get out of a fox's body? Now may I ask you: Is the enlightened man subject to the law of causation?'
Hyakujo said: `The enlightened man is one with the law of causation.'
At the words of Hyakujo the old man was enlightened. `I am emancipated,' he said, paying homage with a deep bow. `I am no more a fox, but I have to leave my body in my dwelling place behind this mountain. Please perform my funeral as a monk.' The he disappeared.
The next day Hyakujo gave an order through the chief monk to prepare to attend the funeral of a monk. `No one was sick in the infirmary,' wondered the monks. `What does our teacher mean?'
After dinner Hyakujo led the monks out and around the mountain. In a cave, with his staff he poked out the corpse of an old fox and then performed the ceremony of cremation.
That evening Hyakujo gave a talk to the monks and told this story about the law of causation.
Obaku, upon hearing this story, asked Hyakujo: `I understand that a long time ago because a certain person gave a wrong Zen answer he became a fox for five hundred rebirths. Now I was to ask: If some modern master is asked many questions, and he always gives the right answer, what will become of him?'
cont'd
Hyakujo said: `You come here near me and I will tell you.'
Obaku went near Hyakujo and slapped the teacher's face with this hand, for he knew this was the answer his teacher intended to give him.
Hyakujo clapped his hands and laughed at the discernment. `I thought a Persian had a red beard,' he said, `and now I know a Persian who has a red beard.'
--------
don't understand the bit about the beard though
>>1143043
>I didn't think the superposition stuff was a joke
It basically has to be, or at least, it's so much more pleasant to treat it as such.
>>1143043
>I didn't think the superposition stuff was a joke
It literally was. The sentiment that Koans are fucking stupid that the post was supposed to express, however, wasn't.
>>1141777
It's the ford in the river, where he takes horses and asses across so they don't shit on the bridge.
>>1143035
>>1143038
Yeah, that's also one of my favorites actually.
In my version of the mumonkan the beard thing sound like this:
>Hyakujo clapped his hands with a laugh and exclaimed, ”I was thinking that the barbarian had a red beard, but now I see before me the red-bearded barbarian himself.”
The barbarian is usually a reference to Bodhidharma, the founder of zen, who was also known for his beard.
What Pai Chang (jap. Hyakujo) is saying there is basically just giving Huang Po (jap. Obaku) his approval in comparing him to Bodhidharma.
There's another interesting Koan in the mumonkan that includes the beard theme:
>Wakuan said, ”Why has the Western Barbarian no beard?”
The western barbarian is obviously Bodhidharma, known for having a beard. Why doesn't he have a beard?
>>1143101
It's the logical answer to me. Who says the bridge has to be over the water?
>>1143101
It's not a metaphor for anything.
Huang Po tried to trap Pai Chang with his question, turning him into a fox if successful.
Pai Chang knows that it's a trap and his way out is to slap Huang Po for trying to trap him instead of answering.
Huang Po reacts fast enough to slap Pai Chang first, though
That shows that Huang Po understood that his own question was a trap and he asked it specifically because of that, not because he actually wanted to know the answer to his question.
Since that shows Pai Chang that Huang Po knows his shit and isn't just asking dumb questions, he gets his approval.
>>1142811
No, I'm just vaguely autistic so I don't see the point.
What is the purpose of answering this question?
I'm asking because there doesn't seem to be a set answer; and the thinking involved doesn't seem to be particularly creative, and the absence of a set answer seems to limit it as a teaching tool.
I listened to a podcast that briefly mentioned Koans. One guy read them out and the other two laughed and called them out on being ridiculous. It was made clear that there wasn't one particular answer; only the answer that the teacher was satisfied with and that was that. I have to say I wasn't very impressed with the host's choice of Koans, but I'm starting to see that most dabble in that sort of ambiguity.
We're all victims of contained thoughts due to our regimented, everyday lives and upbringing, which admittedly do not require such a broad level of thinking. I imagine Koans would be good for that. But what am I attempting to learn by answering these questions?
>>1143236
I'm OP and I don't particularly like them as a teaching device either.
These koan collections were mostly assembled after the golden age of zen.
Using them as a teaching device (like modern rinzai zen does) goes against the actual teachings of
Lin Chi (aka the founder of the rinzai school). Lin Chi was against all kinds of systemized teaching,
koans being collected and made into a system would probably be shunned by him.
One reason reading koan collections is still relevant is, that these collections are the only books actually written by zen masters. They are like zen instruction manuals.
Almost all other zen texts are just sayings and sermons of zen masters compiled by someone who knew them.
The really great masters (like Huang Po, Pai Chang, Ma Tsu etc.) did not use koans though, since koans didn't exists when they were alive.
But the actual point of koans is to go beyond conceptual thinking and that's also what the great masters taught.
If someone today is trying to learn zen on his own, working through the koan collections might be really helpful to them. Since they don't have real master pointing to their mistaken conceptual thinking, koans can sometimes accomplish that.
>>1144805
As an example of a famous koan, let's talk about Case 1 of the gateless gate:
Some monk asks Chao Chou if a dog has buddha nature. Chao Chou says "no".
It's common buddhist knowledge, that everything has buddha nature. It is the all including absolute, how can a dog be excluded of that?
Well, there are 2 dimensions of the koan:
1. The questioner formed a relative understanding of "having buddha nature", which is already wrong
2. The questioner built up some conceptual understanding of buddha nature, which is even worse
Teachings about nirvana, buddha nature, enlightenment, etc. are like taking autumn leaves for gold.
Like stories told to children to stop their tears.
They are taught only to stop people from even greater misunderstandings.
No matter how buddhist or zen your concepts are, they are still concepts and for zen, you need to get rid of them.
The monk hasn't done that yet, he has a conceptual understanding of buddha nature and Chao Chou rightfully denies it's validity with his answer.
This is called the front gate of zen, you need to leave your concepts on the outside.
Of course there is no "answer" at all to this koan. It's meant to point you to a wordless understanding that all concepts are void.
>>1141777
>I post koan, you answer
Have you had any Zen training? How come you are so ready to "explain" the nature of the questions and judge answers of these cases if you haven't? Plenty of armchair analysis in this thread that goes miles off in my humble opinion.
There is some structure to the answers of these things, which is much easier to understand when you consider the context of a personal teacher-student setting. The koans themselves aren't very easy to understand, not because of some mystical metaphoric reason, but because they require actual practice which is demanding. Saying that koans like Joshu's dog has no answer is a bit misleading.
For what it's worth, here are some of my responses. I'm a Soto practitioner at heart though so this is slightly out of my ball-park.
>case 52
Old bridges aren't safe, I've seen neither horses or donkeys in quite a while. I take the bus when i need to go places.
>>1142029
>case 53
Quack, quack.
>>1142942
>case 57
Even on a rainy day, who needs faith? I picked leftovers and filled my belly. I chose my bed at day's end to rest.
>>1145449
>How come you are so ready to "explain" the nature of the questions and judge answers of these cases if you haven't?
Someone asked for their purpose, I explained it.
>Saying that koans like Joshu's dog has no answer is a bit misleading.
If you think there is one correct answers that's weird.
Since it's about destroying conceptual thought, the only answer is natural behaviour that demonstrates wordless understanding.
So an answer that is right when you say it, is probably wrong when I say it, since I'd just be copying you instead
of demonstrating my own understanding.
>koan answers
Meh, your answer smell of zen, which is not a good thing. Forced to sound zen.
The only one I like is your answer to 53, but that's basically just a less intellectual version of my answer.
If you think that only non-intellectual answer like "quack, quack" can ever be right, that's just another doctrine that chan teaches us to get rid of.
As I said, I'm not into soto or rinzai at all, but actually the traditional Chan of Huang Po and Ma Tsu.
I don't think modern zen is a good representation of their teachings at all.
Furthermore, I don't think soto should be called zen, since it barely has any connections to it's origin, which is chan.
It's more dogens own frabrication.
It goes against the classical "no absolutes" chan in saying everyone must sit zazen and that sitting zazen is itself enlightenment, while classical chan masters always said that no methods at all are necessary and we should not believe anyone who has a method for enlightenment.
>>1146390
Koans like Joshu's dog have a traditional kind of answer due to being one of the first koans students are exposed to, it doesn't mean it has only one answer. What is "smell of Zen"? When does something not smell of Zen?
Calling a certain answer non-intellectual only demonstrates your prejudice. Why can't it represent something greater?
Can you explain your reasoning when you're saying that koans have no set answers on the one hand, but Soto can't be Zen on the other? Do you simply not like sitting?
>>1147000
>Koans like Joshu's dog have a traditional kind of answer due to being one of the first koans students are exposed to, it doesn't mean it has only one answer
That's what I'm saying. Maybe it has a traditional answer, but do you really think if some student just knows the traditional answer and says it, that says anything about his understanding of zen?
He'd need to burn his books and get hit with a stick, zen is not about memorizing traditional answers.
>Can you explain your reasoning when you're saying that koans have no set answers on the one hand, but Soto can't be Zen on the other? Do you simply not like sitting?
I don't understand what koans not having set answers has to do with soto not being zen, those topics are unrelated to me. I'd also not generalize this, some koans do have specific answers. Chao Chou's dog is not one of them though.
If you read the texts of Ma Tsu, Pai Chang, Huang Po, Lin Chi, you'd say that all of them denounced meditation practice. You'll also see it when you look beyond the surface level of the 6 patriarchs. Or even at the surface, the peom story of Huineng and Shenxiu is well known and demonstrates what I'm saying.
Soto's weird focus on zazen goes completely against that spirit. Everything that is rigid doctrine is not zen. Zazen is rigid doctrine. Systems that let you formally pass one koan after another until you're a certified master, are just as bad.
>Calling a certain answer non-intellectual only demonstrates your prejudice. Why can't it represent something greater?
That's not what I meant at all.
Most zen people have the prejudice though, that all koan answer need to be non-intellectual. I was criticizing that.
I'm not saying that non-intellectual answers are bad or that a non-intellectual sounding answer can't represent something greater.
>What is "smell of Zen"? When does something not smell of Zen?
Smell of zen means, that something sounds artificial and forced to sound like zen.
>>1148208
Chan practice is eerily similar to mahamudra as far as the whole non-meditation and focus on direct transmission goes. It's funny that I went from practicing zazen to dzogchen and absolutely fucking nothing changed except the gurus are crazier and the jokes not quite as funny.
