Mu

[JimH]

My personal take, which could always be wrong....

A number of years ago, we had a local sangha. I was studying Iaido (the martial art) at the time, and my sensei was a Zen practitioner. He invited me to come check out the sangha and sit, and even come listen to a few of the talks. I did, and one of the talks was on "Mu". What I got out of that talk was that the translation of the term "Mu" was essentially: "I reject the boundaries of the question, and essentially un-ask it". So not exactly "yes", not exactly "no", and not exactly "maybe"....just....Mu.

That was a whole new concept to me -- kind of like saying, "nice try at being all deep, bro...but that's a pointless question." So why study Mu, then? Why wrestle with it? Why can't we just use "Mu" as an answer on tests, if we don't know or remember the answer?

Because in this case, the point is not to answer the question -- the point is to question the question. What do you mean by "Buddha nature"? Why did you ask about a dog? What about cats? etc. The over-arching discussion about koans in general was that they are not honestly *supposed* to have a definitive answer, but are more to get a student to *think*. To question what is meant by the koan, what is the nature of the wordplay, and so on....and perhaps the student gets so frustrated that they yell or vent when in dokusan. All of that is an "answer"...it's not "did I get it right?", but "do I have an answer that I arrived at?"...."do I get the process?".

I'm probably over-thinking things a lot with this, and as I said, I could be waaaaay off. In that case, my answer is it's own "Mu". Feel free to "un-state" it.

Gassho--

--JimH (SatToday)

[Jundo]

That was a whole new concept to me -- kind of like saying, "nice try at being all deep, bro...but that's a pointless question." So why study Mu, then? Why wrestle with it? Why can't we just use "Mu" as an answer on tests, if we don't know or remember the answer?

Lovely.

Many times, instead of analyzing dancing or thinking about the dance ... just dancing.

Gassho, J

STLah

[Eishuu]

Jim,
Being a cat person, whenever I hear that koan, I go straight to 'what about cats?' too! I like what you said about questioning the question - it's kind of like the koan starts to unravel all your assumptions and frameworks. I don't think you're way off; I think you're spot on with this.

Gassho
Lucy
ST/LAH

[Jundo]

That was a whole new concept to me -- kind of like saying, "nice try at being all deep, bro...but that's a pointless question." So why study Mu, then? Why wrestle with it? Why can't we just use "Mu" as an answer on tests, if we don't know or remember the answer?

I want to emphasize that most of the Koans are not just about giving up thinking, and being simple and bubble brained. That is not it either. Nor are they about getting caught up in back and forth philosophizing.

Rather, most of the Koans actually have some point based in basic Mahayana and Zen doctrines and perspective which can be best understood, not by intellectualizing, but by "non-thinking" the meaning.

For example, does a dog have Buddha Nature? If that Buddha Nature is "Emptiness," one best experiences the reality of Emptiness by clearing the head of divisive yes/no thinking.

Here is another example based on Lucy's question:

Jim,
Being a cat person, whenever I hear that koan, I go straight to 'what about cats?' too!

Sorry Lucy ....

Nansen saw the monks of the eastern and western halls fighting over a cat. He seized the cat and told the monks: "If any of you say a good word, you can save the cat."

No one answered. So Nansen boldly cut the cat in two pieces.

That evening Joshu returned and Nansen told him about this. Joshu removed his sandals and, placing them on his head, walked out.

Nansen said: "If you had been there, you could have saved the cat." (Book of Serenity Case 6, Blue Cliff Record 63, Gateless Gate 14)

Before any of our cat lovers or animal rights activists get up in arms ... it is unlikely the the cat was actually killed. Remember that Zen folks "cut in two" by making things "one beyond one" and "kill" by giving the life beyond life or death. No Zen Priest would so easily violate the Precept on Killing living beings (granted, back in the day, cats were not seen as cuddly pets, but more like vermin such as racoons and wild squirrels and wild rabbits and bats and rats. Even to this day, my mother-in-law who was raised on a farm in Japan can't quite understand why we adore our "varmint". So, I am not sure if Nansen actually killed the cat or not). Still, this Koan only truly opened for me when a Teacher pointed out that most references to "swords" and "cutting" in Zen stories allude to the "Sword of Wisdom" which actually cuts "into one" and wholeness, or "not two." Swinging this Zen Sword brings all the broken pieces of the world together.

In fact, the monks by their arguing had already cut the cat in two by their divided thinking and selfishness, the real division of east and west. By causing the monks to drop their divisions and opinions, Nansen saved the cat, as did Joshu.

So, like with the Mu Koan, and the famous Koan "Is the Flag Moving or the wind? It is the mind moving", another reMINDer to realize Emptiness and Wholeness by giving up the fight and debate and mental divisions.

Something like that.

Now, the part about Joshu putting the shoes on his head: Weird, right? Well, maybe not so much. Soto Teacher Norman Fischer explains ..

We are all cut in two of course. That’s living in this world of discrimination and difference. I am me; therefore, I am not you. But we are also cut in one, only we don’t know it. Being cut in one is “I am me and all is included in that, you and everything else.” We practice zazen to remember that we are cut in one, as well as two. When we are dead, we’ll all be cut in one and only one. But we are dying all the time. If we are Zen monks, we devote ourselves to sitting on our cushions so that we can see this and integrate it into our everyday living. When Zhaozho [Joshu] comes back later and puts his sandals on his head, this is what he is saying. Putting a sandal on the head was a sign of mourning in ancient China. Zhaozho is expressing, “Teacher, do not fool me with your pantomime. You and I both know that the cat is already dead. You and I are already dead. All disputes are already settled. All things are beyond coming and going, vast and wide, at peace.”
https://www.lionsroar.com/quick-who-can-save-this-cat/

Gassho, Jundo (Cat Lover)

SatTodayLAH

[Eishuu]

I've always found that cat koan quite distressing! I'd be inclined to punch Nansen on the nose and rescue the cat... I feel a little better about it after your illuminating explanation.
Thank you

Gassho
Lucy
ST/LAH

[Jishin]

A good zen word kills the cat.

A good zen action saves the cat.

No time for zen bs. Snatch the cat and save it with compassionate action!

[emoji4]

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

[JimH]

Still, this Koan only truly opened for me when a Teacher pointed out that most references to "swords" and "cutting" in Zen stories allude to the "Sword of Wisdom" which actually cuts "into one" and wholeness, or "not two." Swinging this Zen Sword brings all the broken pieces of the world together.

When I was studying Iaido, I named my sword: "Cuts through shadows". It was a reference to using the sword metaphorically through the art of Iaido, and as a meditative experience....to not think about cutting, or think about the actions, but just *do*. "There is no one cutting, there is nothing being cut, the action is itself." I didn't know about the "Sword of Wisdom", but did know (and often still reflect on) the "Sword that gives life, the sword that takes life".

The "cat koan" always makes me thing of Schroedinger's Cat, and how Zen-like that is. Without being perceived, the cat is simultaneously alive and dead....the act of observing the cat puts it into one of the two states. Similarly, in the koan, the cat is both "not cut" and "cut"; Nansen takes the action to put the cat into one state over the other (literally or metaphorically!). Basically, arguing about something or discussing something is kind of pointless until you take a stance....you either cut the cat or you don't (fish or cut bait? Etc.).

Based on what I had learned, I always thought the deeper point of koans was not to *avoid* thinking, but possibly to push the student to *overthink*, and arrive at an answer....a moment of enlightenment when they see the greater idea. For example, I also studied karate (still play with it. ) for years. We practiced the same moves over and over, going through them routinely sometimes, just to get them down. Every now and again, when going through the motions, a student would have a realization: "if I do *this*, I have an opening to do *this*....AHHHH! So THAT'S why this works!" Then the moves made more sense, and more doors opened up. In koans, you get one answer, see the process, and start looking at things for the deeper meaning. "Why am I worrying about whether a dog has Buddha nature or not? " can turn into "What exactly IS Buddha nature?" and "How do I recognize Buddha nature in myself and others?", etc.

Anyway.....I've had animal companions as long as I can remember....both dogs and cats, as well as rabbits, geckos, and hermit crabs. I even shared my life with a dog we named "Buddha". Did he have Buddha nature? I can say "yes" without hesitation. As Buddha, how could he not?

Gassho--

--JimH (SatToday)