A monk asked Jōshū, “Has a dog the Buddha Nature?” Jōshū answered, “Mu.”
Comment
Mumon say this very word, "Mu" is the barrier to the patriarchs and calls it the front gate to Zen. He also mentions a very interesting expression when mentioning what is needed to attain this 'subtle realization', to "cut off the way of thinking." What does he mean by this?
I believe he is referencing the conceptual thought, the one that deals with meanings, definitions and semantic consistency. Once you cut off, as in, let go of these thought-patterns, it becomes clear, not what is meant, but what is intended.
What is meant will never be one hundred percent clear, as much as we try it, because the words one sees with the one pair of eyes is not the same another sees, with a different pair of eyes. Behind these differences in conceptual thinking, the intention is accessible and transparent to all, and can be realized through the effort of letting go of your conceptions, thoughts and pre-conscious thoughts, until you master the balance of an empty mind.
The question, however, has been answered? Delving into the subject of meanings, all interpretations are possible, and the relative thoughts of "yes" or "no" could be brought into question and, if it satisfies your preconceptions, you might as well leave it like this. Nevertheless, I think it's important not to bring out the relative, or even the absolute discussion.
A dog can't use human language to communicate with us, so the nature of its mind is not accessible through words, so how can we be really sure how its mind works? In this way, we cannot, ever, know what a dog thinks, and even if it thinks, which also falls under what definition we give to what constitutes thinking.
"Mu" means "nothing", but there is no definition available for "mu" in English, which is why the translated version is even more thought-provoking and adequate to the intention of Jōshū's answer. It makes it clear it's not about meaning.
For this specific case, I have two different interpretations.
The first, is appropriate with the meaning of "nothing" from the original text. It calls the monk to realize that the dog is empty-minded, meaning it doesn't have conceptual thinking behind its actions and behavior, it just is, just like we humans, once our minds are free.
The second intepretation I give, which I prefer, is Jōshū's calling the monk to practice emptiness further. Because what difference does it really make? Do you only play with a dog if it has Buddha Nature? Do you treat it differently if it has Buddha Nature? If you have Buddha Nature, you wouldn't treat it differently, so if you practice emptiness of mind, it makes no difference whether the dog has it or not, you'd still give him food, shelter, care and love.
Verse
Ask a dog if it has buddha nature
"Bark" is the best answer you'll get
If that leaves you unsatisfied,
"Mu" should be the answer you need.
Submitted January 09, 2020 at 11:32AM by felipeforte https://ift.tt/309sdZV
No comments:
Post a Comment