Understanding koans
misecmisc1
I am a HinduIndia Veteran
Hi All,
I came across the below koan:
Zen master Congshen of Zhaozhou [Zhenji] asked his teacher, Nanquan, “Where will the
one who knows go?”
Nanquan said, “To a donor’s house near the mountain, and become a water buffalo.”
Zhaozhou thanked him for his teaching.
Nanquan said, “Late last night the moonlight came through the window.”
I have not read the commentary on this case.
I was thinking about the above koan and below is my understanding of this koan:
Zhaozhou asked Nanquan about what will happen in the rebirth of one that knows. Nanquan replied by saying that that will become a water buffalo. The meaning which Nanquan was trying to say was just like the water buffalo is hooked up on a pole, so the mind which knows will be hooked up or grab hold of or cling to its knowing. Then Zhaozhou thanked him for the teaching. Then Nanquan said - Late last night the moonlight came through the window - meaning last night Zhaozhou experienced an awakening moment, when he realized that clinging to something is going to lead to a rebirth and so letting go of all knowing can lead to liberation.
So can someone throw some pointers to how to understand the above koan? Also is my understanding of the above koan totally incorrect? it can be totally incorrect, as I was just trying to analyze this koan based on my thinking and since i am a stupid ignorant person, so my understanding of this koan can be totally incorrect. So if it is incorrect, then please help me to correct my understanding of this koan. Thanks in advance.
Comments
>
No, not really. Interpretation and understanding is a personal thing, and indicative of your place on the Path.
But only to you, and not in comparison to anyone else's place on their path.
There is no 'correct' or 'incorrect'.
There is only "I see...." from the individual.
And your "I see...." may very well be completely different to my "I see...." but neither of us could be judged as wrong.
Or right.
But if this is the case, then how does that system work, where the students have to pass through the different gate levels and what i have come to know from the different commentaries is that the students meditate on the koan and then go to the teacher to tell him his understanding and the teacher then either rejects or accepts the student's understanding, based on which the student has to again chew on the koan and go back to the teacher if his understanding is wrong - or - he can take the next level of koan if his understanding is correct.
This is not to say that I am trying to follow that path, but at least the above seems to indicate that there is something like more correct understanding and something like less correct understanding or very incorrect understanding of the koan.
Setting Buddhist frameworks aside for a moment, is the one who makes this observation stupid and ignorant? Isn't such an observation stupid and ignorant? Isn't it perhaps excessive, much as "I (or he or she) am wise and enlightened" might be?
In my mind, these are serious questions to be asked with a seriousness that surpasses the Tinker Toys of something called "Buddhism." Of course, others may not agree. OK.
Patience and determination will settle the matter of a beloved koan. But patience and determination are necessary, I'd say, and something called "Buddhism" may indeed prove useful.
So what will be the practical method of finding the answer to a koan like above? Is thinking going to help or thinking is completely useless in finding the answer to the above koan? I read somewhere that the students meditate on the koan, but what does that mean - does it mean they keep on repeating a key word of the koan through-out their sitting time like some mantra chanting - or what is the method of meditating on koan? Is meditating on koan the only way to get an answer of a koan - if it is, then unfortunately i do not have enough time these days to do sitting practice, so seems like I would not be able to work on koans then to find their answers.
Please suggest. Thanks in advance.
I would suggest magic.
Do nothing, maybe wave a wand when you have time and hey presto. Hope that is the sort of answer you feel is appropriate? Hope others, including you can come up with something realistic . . .
What am I missing here?
@misecmisc1 -- Stick it in your back pocket. Take it with you everywhere. Sort of like your wallet: Don't badger and bully. Just take it with you and pull it out from time to time. Allow it to gain its own importance instead of trying to give it importance.
Will some magical light bulb go off? I haven't got a clue. It may be that the koan you are really working on hasn't expressed itself yet. Or perhaps it has and you happened not to be looking. Just because you forget about a koan doesn't mean the koan is missing or has been eradicated.
Buddhism concerns your life, not your 'understanding' or 'meaning' or 'wisdom.' Is your life really that confused? Do you have a problem peeing after you get out of bed in the morning? What are things like when you aren't distressed by 'ignorance' or seduced by 'wisdom?'
Just bring your koan with you and see what happens.
There are different ways of dealing with koans, depending on the Zen tradition you're following. Not every Zen school uses koans like mantras, where the words aren't supposed to make sense and just repeating "MU!" to yourself 12 hours a day brings some mystical wisdom. Also, in an ideal Zen sangha, the Master would assign you a particular koan that he felt you were ready for and grade you on your progress like any oral exam. Of course, even Zazen halls are not perfect incubators of enlightenment and not all Masters are equal to the challenge of teaching this way.
In the case of the koan you mention, a Master that used koans would say don't worry about that one because it's not the one he assigned to you. But for us, we can still get a glimpse of what the Zen point is if we become familiar with the language and metaphors used. We might not be able to see the moon, but we can examine the pointing finger.
Indeed, pointing fingers can be very useful!
My idea of a zen teacher is that they point you to your awakened mind; a koan does this because it is the transference of knowledge from a teacher (who hopefully has been awakened to his or her mind) that meaningfully assists the students mind to concentrate on what they are searching for. What is meditation other than concentrating the mind on something to bring them to their present awareness.
I have been reading some Dzogchen stuff recently. For me ' a water buffalo' meant that Buddha Nature is not only non-suffering. Buddha nature is every being even suffering.
What does the one who knows know?
All that arises passes away and is not self.
Ah, good old Nanquan of the "cutting a kitten in half" story.
@misecmisc1 you're lacking an important bit of information to decypher the koan. Nanquan was a smart-ass with little patience for stupid questions, according to what we learn about him in the records. "One who knows" is Zen-speak for enlightenment or realizing one's Buddha Nature, same as @pegembara pointed out. According to what those monks were taught, that meant ending the cycle of rebirth. So if you become enlightened and aren't reborn when you die, then where do you go, if not back to samsara? That is the question being asked of old Nanquan.
So what did the old Zen Master answer, instead of mouthing nonsense words about Nirvana? A water buffalo. Really? That's the reward for enlightenment?
But why not? As @Jeffrey points out, even a water buffalo is Buddha Nature. When dualism is conquered, form and emptiness become one. Even the shit from the buffalo is Buddha Nature, as it enriches and fertilizes the rice fields.
Nanquan answered in a way that only makes sense if you begin to comprehend Buddha-Nature. Can you see where the koan is trying to lead you to?
Thanks @Cinorjer for your above explanation.
I was thinking about the last line of the above koan - Then Nanquan said - Late last night the moonlight came through the window.
Just a thought came to my mind about the above statement - for moonlight to come, a window is needed - so what Nanquan was trying to say that enlightenment came through delusion - or - for enlightenment to shine, ignorance is needed. Even though enlightenment or moonlight is everywhere, yet if we have to experience moonlight, then initially we have to be at a place where moonlight is not available like a room with closed window and then we can open the window to experience moonlight. So thanks to the window that moonlight could be experienced - because if there was no window and everywhere there is moonlight, how could the moonlight be experienced - just like fish cannot feel the experience of touching water, because it lives its whole life in water and the moment it comes out of water it dies - so to experience enlightenment, ignorance is needed - and may be we are all already enlightened, but we cannot feel it, not because its not there, but because there is nothing else except it - and we only something when a change happens and when all the time it is the same thing, then how will be feel that thing or know that thing, may be that is why when the mind is quiet as the holy texts says, then something fundamental can be observed or realized - not by we going forward to realize things, but by various things coming and getting actualized by themselves as Dogen taught in Genjokoan. Duality is needed to understand anything - or in other words, understanding anything creates duality, though initially there may be no duality anywhere.
Hi All,
But a question raises here - who is the one who knows? or what did Dogen meant by dropping of body and mind? May be I am a confused idiot person, who is not able to understand the above thing, so please help me to understand this thing. Thanks in advance.
@misecmisc1
You’re not stupid. You come up with nice ideas about the koan and you formulate interesting questions.
I’m no expert on koan-practice but my theory says that if you try to solve it as if it were a puzzle you keep running around in circles. Every answer produces another question.
I think in the Lankavatara-sutra it says that we need “a revolution on the deepest level of consciousness”.
And for helping you getting at that point you don’t need answers; you need the koan to be an unanswered question.
But that’s just my humble opinion.
A koan is not a Buddhist lecture of half an hour that is coded into half a minute of apparent nonsense.
And your job is not to decode it back into the lecture of half an hour.
@zenff : Thanks for your answers. I wanted to mark them as insightful, but the link for clicking a post as insightful is not appearing. Seems like the IT team @Linc of this website is practically trying to show emptiness here - but no, no, not here please
- yah yah i am attached to form - you got it, but please exclude this website from practically demonstrating heart sutra 
Well said @zenff,
A koan brings us into the relationship with the experiencing of the koan, not the decoding, conjecture, intellectual analysis etc.
If we practice sitting/dhyana we do not pontificate, decode and wonder what is happening, except in the early stages, which may go on for a while . . .
We just sit. A Koan just sits.
Really, no one can help you understand or answer koans. My zen master teacher once said "I could tell you all the answers to all the koans, but that still won't help you answer them". When it comes to koans, you're on your own. A skillful teacher can direct you to how to do koan practice properly. They can give you the proper koan for your practice. They can tell you when you understand it. But not even they can help you understand them. The answers naturally come out of your own practice, not by thinking about what other people say about it.
Hi All,
I read the below koan:
Changsha was once asked by Emperor’s Secretary Du, “When you chop an earthworm
into two pieces, both pieces keep moving. I wonder, in which piece is the buddha
nature?”
Changsha said, “Don’t have illusory thoughts.”
Du said, “How are we to understand that they are both moving?”
Changsha said, “Understand that air and fire are not yet scattered.”
Du said nothing.
Changsha called Du,6 and Du responded, “Yes?”
Changsha said, “Isn’t this your true self?”
Du said, “Apart from my answering, is there another true self?”
Changsha said, “I can’t call you Emperor.”
Du said, “If so, would my not answering also be my true self?”
Changsha said, “It’s not a matter of answering me or not. But since the beginningless
kalpa, the question to answer or not has been the root of birth and death.” Then he
recited a verse:
Students of the Way don’t know the truth.
They only know their past consciousness.
This is the basis of endless birth and death.
The deluded call it the original self.
Below is my understanding of the above koan.
Du misunderstood Buddha-nature as if it was something, rather Buddha-nature as Dogen taught is impermanence, which implies just change - so since it is not an entity in itself, so the question of asking for its location does not stand. So Changsha said that do not think of it in that way. Then Du asked - then how to understand that the two pieces of earthworm are still alive? Then Changsha said that their form element of the 5 aggregate has not scatterred as the life force still remains. Then Du said nothing.
Then Changsha called Du and then Du responded by yes. Then Du asked - apart from my answering , is there another true self - so he was asking apart from what is apparent from outside, is there any other true self in him? Then Changsha replied saying that he could not call the true self of Du and he designated the true self as Emperor. Then Du said - if this is the case, then would my not answering you also be my true self? Changsha replied that it does not matter whether you reply to me or not, but this urge to answer the question by grasping at phenonmena has been the root cause of ignorance, which leads to the cycle of birth and death. Then Changsha recited a verse, which meant that students of the way dont know the truth, because truth is not that kind of thing which someone can know and they can only know what has happened in their past moments of their lives. This knowing or grasping keeps ignorance intact, which forms the basis of further birth and death. This knowing, which is the secondary, is mistakenly called by the deluded as the original self.
So whereever my understanding of the above koan is going wrong, please help me to correct my understanding.
Still 2 things I am not clear about the above koan - I am not clear about how to understand Du's question when Du said, “How are we to understand that they are both moving?” and then Changsha said, “Understand that air and fire are not yet scattered.” How to understand this thing or what is that thing which we call life force, which gets scattered into two pieces and yet both pieces are alive - what happened when the earthworm was cut in two pieces?
Is there a true self something like primordial mind, which has neither beginning nor end - or - what is it that after the dropping of body and mind still remains and is aware of the prajna or wisdom that comes from complete letting go?
One more question came to my mind - Who is it that knows the Heart Sutra - or who sees the emptiness of all things and then knows that these things are empty and then formulated the Heart Sutra - in other words, what thing in Avalokiteshwara came to know that everything is empty - what was that original self, awareness or some other thing?
May be I am too stupid that still I am not able to figure these things out - or - may be I am approaching the things from an incorrect direction due to my ignorance.
So I will request you all to please answer my above 2 queries on the above koan and also my above query on who knows Heart Sutra. Thanks in advance for your help in this regard.
Regarding the Koan:
Read @seeker242's comment, above yours.
The very first line.
As to the Heart Sutra - never read it, but I'm sure someone will offer assistance on that one....
Also, some koans seem to be designed so that any one answer can lead to at least one more question.
Knowing what we do about earthworms, if one is cut in half the two pieces will keep moving just as a whole one with its brain removed will. It doesn't make 2 earthworms...
I think Changsha was just saying the thing ain't quite done dying yet. When it gets to a certain point of decomposition, both pieces will stop moving.
I feel even the rocks have Buddha nature though so in each piece of the earthworm, every atom, has said nature.
The business about the self seems to point to the two truths. There is no absolute Du only a relative Du.
As for the one who knows, would that not be Buddha?
@misecmisc1 I wish you wouldn't call yourself stupid... If anything you're too smart for you're own good.
In the first story, the Zen master asked the novice monk:
“Tell me about your understanding of the Heart sutra.”
The novice monk joined his palms and replied:
“I have understood that the five skandhas are empty. There are no eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body or mind; there are no forms, sounds, smells, tastes, feelings, or objects of mind; the six consciousnesses do not exist, the eighteen realms of phenomena do not exist, the twelve links of dependent arising do not exist, and even wisdom and attainment do not exist.”
“Do you believe what it says?”
“Yes, I truly believe what it says.”
“Come closer to me,” the Zen master instructed the novice monk. When the novice monk drew near, the Zen master immediately used his thumb and index finger to pinch and twist the novice’s nose.
In great agony, the novice cried out “Teacher! You’re hurting me!” The Zen master looked at the novice. “Just now you said that the nose doesn’t exist. But if the nose doesn’t exist then what’s hurting?”
From http://plumvillage.org/news/thich-nhat-hanh-new-heart-sutra-translation/
The Heart Sutra is wonderful. If I ever opened a Zen Hall, I would tell the students to meditate and contemplate the Heart Sutra as their only koan.
"Emptiness is form, and form is emptiness. What does this mean?"
Absolutely not but relatively yes.
Just throwing that out there
But can I get my understanding of the koans checked to see if the understanding is going in the correct direction or in wrong direction?
So should a person like me, who has no zen monastry near-by my work city, nor has the time to even search for it, so leave about going to visit the monastry to find a teacher - so should a person like me not even try to even understand the koans on at least a superficial level, leave about understanding it at a deeper level? Since koans include the words or phrases, which attribute to the Chinese literature of the Song dynasty as I have heard in a dhamma talk by a Zen monk, so would not a little understanding on a superficial level of what the koan is saying needed to even try to analyze what the koan is saying about?
Hi All,
Please suggest. Thanks in advance.
@misecmisc1 I would assess the koans in a lighthearted way. Also importantly you should set up a regular meditation practice if you haven't already.
You might also get a T-shirt that says "I solved a koan!" haha
@Cinorjer what if Sariputra grabbed Avalokiteshevras nose?
“I have understood that the five skandhas are empty. The eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body or mind; the forms, sounds, smells, tastes, feelings, or objects of mind; the six consciousnesses, the eighteen realms of phenomena are all dependently coarisen."
They neither exist nor don't exist but with contact/attention as a condition, the seer and the seen, the hearer and the heard etc can be discerned.
>
No. It's not up to us to understand for you.
>
Even Zen Buddhists who can do all of the above, don't often understand them at any level - so why should you??
>
Whatever YOU understand about a particular Koan, is YOUR understanding of it. Nobody else's.
And that's OK.