|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 9, 2023 11:01:53 GMT -5
The finger raised as opposed to mental gyrations. Still it doesn't do it, Zen, justice. Juzhi didn't cut off the finger to punish. I invite you NOT to think about it. It's like the punchline in a joke. If you have to explain it, then it's not a joke. Not that thinking isn't fun. It is. It's taking it, and therefore yourself, seriously. Hullabaloo made grandiose. I was thinking in Taoism opposites are complements. Quite different than advaita, I think. exactly. And you only really understand the Supreme Ultimate Tai Chi symbol when you see it as moving, the white dot expands to take-over the black, and vice versa, and the point of maximum a black dot remains in the white (and vice versa). This is all of life, multiple movements of yin and yang. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Dec 20, 2023 4:58:10 GMT -5
Two cows are standing in the pasture. One turns to the other and says, “Although pi is usually abbreviated to five numbers, it actually goes on into infinity.”
The second cow turns to the first and says, “Moo.”
EDIT: A monk once asked Jo Ju, “Does a dog have Buddha-nature?” Jo Ju answered, “Mu!”
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 20, 2023 6:56:06 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as:
1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct?
2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?"
3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say?
4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature?
If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid.
FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 20, 2023 8:07:43 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as: 1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct? 2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?" 3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say? 4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature? If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid. FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan. * woof! * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(negative) |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 20, 2023 8:21:34 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as: 1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct? 2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?" 3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say? 4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature? If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid. FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan. * woof! * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(negative)Haha! You're stealing someone else's treasure! Question one, above, is considered the easiest of the four questions posted, but I never saw the answer to that one until a few weeks ago when it happened to cross my mind while driving somewhere. After seeing the obvious answer, I felt like kicking myself!  |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Dec 20, 2023 10:45:27 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as: 1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct? 2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?" 3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say? 4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature? If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid. FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan. I always read about this koan and saw it as weirdly innappropriate. Nothing including humans "have" Buddha nature. This is plainly obvious. "To have" implies possession, very different than "to be." Plus the notion that anyone or anything is enlightened seems foreign. How can Buddha-nature be acausal if you don't have it then you do? Magic? Quantum particles, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Dec 20, 2023 11:20:22 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as: 1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct? 2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?" 3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say? 4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature? If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid. FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan. I always read about this koan and saw it as weirdly innappropriate. Nothing including humans "have" Buddha nature. This is plainly obvious. "To have" implies possession, very different than "to be." Plus the notion that anyone or anything is enlightened seems foreign. How can Buddha-nature be acausal if you don't have it then you do? Magic? Quantum particles, yes. Nice. An existential dog absent the last existential tick on its back is a degree lighter, maybe notices fewer causal itches. With that 'sacred' itch, scratching happens until it stops allltogether. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 20, 2023 11:20:32 GMT -5
Haha! You're stealing someone else's treasure! That cad .. that grinch!  |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 20, 2023 12:22:37 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as: 1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct? 2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?" 3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say? 4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature? If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid. FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan. I always read about this koan and saw it as weirdly innappropriate. Nothing including humans "have" Buddha nature. This is plainly obvious. "To have" implies possession, very different than "to be." Plus the notion that anyone or anything is enlightened seems foreign. How can Buddha-nature be acausal if you don't have it then you do? Magic? Quantum particles, yes. I always interpreted "having Buddha Nature" as equivalent to saying "everything is an aspect of the absolute" or "everything is a part of God." FWIW, Buddha Nature is neither causal nor acausal; it is what it is beyond ideation. Only the realization of Buddha Nature, or THIS, is acausal. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Dec 20, 2023 13:51:38 GMT -5
I always read about this koan and saw it as weirdly innappropriate. Nothing including humans "have" Buddha nature. This is plainly obvious. "To have" implies possession, very different than "to be." Plus the notion that anyone or anything is enlightened seems foreign. How can Buddha-nature be acausal if you don't have it then you do? Magic? Quantum particles, yes. I always interpreted "having Buddha Nature" as equivalent to saying "everything is an aspect of the absolute" or "everything is a part of God." FWIW, Buddha Nature is neither causal nor acausal; it is what it is beyond ideation. Only the realization of Buddha Nature, or THIS, is acausal. I was just messing with the acausal clique. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 20, 2023 15:49:44 GMT -5
"Mu" means "no" for those unfamiliar with this koan. In the Rinzai Zen tradition, the "Mu" koan is given to students interested in enlightenment. If s student answers the koan ("what is Mu?") correctly, s/he is often tested (to check if s/he was given the answer by someone else by being asked other related koans, such as: 1. The Buddha said that everything has Buddha Nature (is THIS), but Jo Ju said that a dog does NOT have Buddha Nature (is NOT THIS). Which master was correct? 2. Why did Jo Ju answer "Mu?" 3. If you met Mu at the train station on a Saturday morning, what would you say? 4. Does a dog actually have Buddha nature? If a student can answer these kinds of questions spontaneously, then his/her answer to the Mu koan is accepted as valid. FWIW, there are dozens of fascinating and humorous stories about various students who struggled with the Mu koan. I always read about this koan and saw it as weirdly innappropriate. Nothing including humans "have" Buddha nature. This is plainly obvious. "To have" implies possession, very different than "to be." Plus the notion that anyone or anything is enlightened seems foreign. How can Buddha-nature be acausal if you don't have it then you do? Magic? Quantum particles, yes. was basically Dogen's question. (If we already have Buddha-nature, why do we have to practice and meditate and work to realize it?) He went around asking everyone, wtf people? He eventually even went to China, still asking. Just when he was about to give up, he found his teacher (who had the answer). When his teacher died within a couple of years, he went back to Japan to teach. What he found? Zazen is enlightenment, enlightenment is zazen. No if this, then that, no cause and effect. Just do zazen. Gudo Nishijima ~believed~ Dogen *reverse engineered* Buddhism to find the original teaching of Buddha. He ~believed~ Nagarjuna did the same thing. IOW, most Buddhists have gotten the 4 Noble Truths, wrong, according to Nishijima. (That's kind of tipping my toes into the waters, starting a new thread, sometime). |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 20, 2023 16:32:27 GMT -5
I always read about this koan and saw it as weirdly innappropriate. Nothing including humans "have" Buddha nature. This is plainly obvious. "To have" implies possession, very different than "to be." Plus the notion that anyone or anything is enlightened seems foreign. How can Buddha-nature be acausal if you don't have it then you do? Magic? Quantum particles, yes. was basically Dogen's question. (If we already have Buddha-nature, why do we have to practice and meditate and work to realize it?) He went around asking everyone, wtf people? He eventually even went to China, still asking. Just when he was about to give up, he found his teacher (who had the answer). When his teacher died within a couple of years, he went back to Japan to teach. What he found? Zazen is enlightenment, enlightenment is zazen. No if this, then that, no cause and effect. Just do zazen. Gudo Nishijima ~believed~ Dogen *reverse engineered* Buddhism to find the original teaching of Buddha. He ~believed~ Nagarjuna did the same thing. IOW, most Buddhists have gotten the 4 Noble Truths, wrong, according to Nishijima. (That's kind of tipping my toes into the waters, starting a new thread, sometime). IMO, Dogen's teaching is usually misunderstood. If zazen is enlightenment, then going to the grocery store is also enlightenment, and I doubt that many people would agree with that idea because going to the grocery store isn't imagined as a particularly spiritual activity. To understand where Dogen was coming from it helps to understand what was going on in Zen during the time he was searching for the truth. Dogen was a slow learner! Haha. Rinzai, by contrast, woke up in two years, and the story of how he woke up is hysterically funny. In fact, I just told that story to someone this morning, and everyone in the room got a big laugh. Here's a great koan for people who enjoy them: Dogen was sitting in meditation in China. He woke up when the monk sitting beside him got whacked with the Zen stick. Why did hearing his fellow monk get whacked, wake up Dogen? Here's another koan: Dogen later said that zazen is enlightenment and enlightenment is zazen, but he also told people that he woke up after hearing a fellow monk get whacked with a Zen stick. If sitting in Zen is already enlightenment, then why did Dogen tell people that he woke up that day if he was already awake? |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Dec 20, 2023 17:10:31 GMT -5
This was basically Dogen's question. (If we already have Buddha-nature, why do we have to practice and meditate and work to realize it?) He went around asking everyone, wtf people? He eventually even went to China, still asking. Just when he was about to give up, he found his teacher (who had the answer). When his teacher died within a couple of years, he went back to Japan to teach. What he found? Zazen is enlightenment, enlightenment is zazen. No if this, then that, no cause and effect. Just do zazen. Gudo Nishijima ~believed~ Dogen *reverse engineered* Buddhism to find the original teaching of Buddha. He ~believed~ Nagarjuna did the same thing. IOW, most Buddhists have gotten the 4 Noble Truths, wrong, according to Nishijima. (That's kind of tipping my toes into the waters, starting a new thread, sometime). IMO, Dogen's teaching is usually misunderstood. If zazen is enlightenment, then going to the grocery store is also enlightenment, and I doubt that many people would agree with that idea because going to the grocery store isn't imagined as a particularly spiritual activity. To understand where Dogen was coming from it helps to understand what was going on in Zen during the time he was searching for the truth. Dogen was a slow learner! Haha. Rinzai, by contrast, woke up in two years, and the story of how he woke up is hysterically funny. In fact, I just told that story to someone this morning, and everyone in the room got a big laugh. Here's a great koan for people who enjoy them: Dogen was sitting in meditation in China. He woke up when the monk sitting beside him got whacked with the Zen stick. Why did hearing his fellow monk get whacked, wake up Dogen? Here's another koan: Dogen later said that zazen is enlightenment and enlightenment is zazen, but he also told people that he woke up after hearing a fellow monk get whacked with a Zen stick. If sitting in Zen is already enlightenment, then why did Dogen tell people that he woke up that day if he was already awake? If going to the grocery store for filet mignon, then it's definitely unenlightenment. Inevitably everything is practice if you're Dogen, even tying your shoes. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 20, 2023 17:42:36 GMT -5
IMO, Dogen's teaching is usually misunderstood. If zazen is enlightenment, then going to the grocery store is also enlightenment, and I doubt that many people would agree with that idea because going to the grocery store isn't imagined as a particularly spiritual activity. To understand where Dogen was coming from it helps to understand what was going on in Zen during the time he was searching for the truth. Dogen was a slow learner! Haha. Rinzai, by contrast, woke up in two years, and the story of how he woke up is hysterically funny. In fact, I just told that story to someone this morning, and everyone in the room got a big laugh. Here's a great koan for people who enjoy them: Dogen was sitting in meditation in China. He woke up when the monk sitting beside him got whacked with the Zen stick. Why did hearing his fellow monk get whacked, wake up Dogen? Here's another koan: Dogen later said that zazen is enlightenment and enlightenment is zazen, but he also told people that he woke up after hearing a fellow monk get whacked with a Zen stick. If sitting in Zen is already enlightenment, then why did Dogen tell people that he woke up that day if he was already awake? If going to the grocery store for filet mignon, then it's definitely unenlightenment. Inevitably everything is practice if you're Dogen, even tying your shoes. |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Dec 20, 2023 21:17:56 GMT -5
If sitting in Zen is already enlightenment, then why did Dogen tell people that he woke up that day if he was already awake? There is no contradiction. Awareness is already the case, but becoming aware of Awareness, is an awakening. |
|
