Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post Reply
User avatar
FiveSkandhas
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:40 pm

Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by FiveSkandhas »

‘Nowadays in great Sung China there is a certain group of unreliable fellows who have now formed such a crowd that they cannot be defeated by a small group of real people. They say that this talk of the East Mountain moving over the water, and such stories as Master Nansen's Sickle, are stories which cannot be understood rationally. Their idea is as follows: "A story that is dependent on any kind of thoughtful consideration cannot be a Zen story of the Buddhist patriarchs. But stories that cannot be understood rationally are indeed the Buddhist patriarchs stories. This is why such things as Master Obaku's use of the staff and Master Rinzai's cry of katsu, which are beyond rational understanding and unrelated to intellectual consideration, represent the great enlightenment [that existed] even before the sprouting of creation. The reason that many of the teaching methods of past masters employed words that cut through confusion was that [their teachings] were beyond rational understanding." Those who say such things have never met a true master and they have no eyes of real Buddhist study; they are just little pups who do not deserve to be discussed. For the last two or three hundred years in China there have been many such demons, many such shavelings like the band of six. It is so pitiful that the great truth of the Buddhist Patriarch has gone to ruin. Their understanding cannot even match that of the sravaka in Hinayana Buddhism; they are even more stupid than non-Buddhists. They are not laymen, they are not monks, they are not human beings, and they are not gods in heaven; they are more stupid than animals that study Buddhism. What these shavelings call incomprehensible stories are incomprehensible only to them; the Buddhist patriarchs were not like that. We should not fail to study the concrete path by which the Buddhist patriarchs understand, just because [the path] is not understandable to those [shavelings]. If [the stories] were ultimately beyond rational understanding, their own reasoning now must also be wide of the mark."
Master Dogen, Sansui Gyo
"One should cultivate contemplation in one’s foibles. The foibles are like fish, and contemplation is like fishing hooks. If there are no fish, then the fishing hooks have no use. The bigger the fish is, the better the result we will get. As long as the fishing hooks keep at it, all foibles will eventually be contained and controlled at will." -Zhiyi

"Just be kind." -Atisha
User avatar
FiveSkandhas
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by FiveSkandhas »

It is often said that koans and zen stories are "beyond rational thought" and intended to "shock" the seeker into some kind of non-rational state. I take Dogen at his literal word in denouncing this simplistic misunderstanding.

First of all, koans are not nonsensical. They often contain references that do not translate well into English, and involve wordplay based on classical Chinese allusions. As a simple example, here is a famous interaction:
Question: Why did Bodhidharma come to China?
Answer: Three pounds of flax.
The English translation often begins and ends there, and this is a frequently given example of the "nonsensical" or "illogical" nature of koans and Zen dialogue. However, what is not translated (and what would be known to both the questioner and respondant) is that it took 3 pounds of flax to make a certain classical style of Buddhist robe. Suddenly the answer deepens. It is not just about flax; it is also about Buddhist robes. The question takes on a multivalent aspect: does it refer to the propagation of Buddhism? The meaningless of robes as mere symbols? The meaningfulness of robes in Bodhidharma's cross-cultural pollination? Something else? What exactly is going on here? I am not qualified to say more, but it is worth noting that several layers of meaning are being sifted through here, and more than a mere "shocking, meaningless statement" is at play.

Traditionally trained Zen clerics struggle with koans on a deeply personal level: I am not suggesting the exercise is one of mere learned word-play. But koan study also involves the study of classical Chinese, of commentaries on koans, and the selection of "capping phrases" from manuals of classical expression. I hold it involves a kind of jousting and highly learned word-play, although the essence of the matter also necessitates personal response and awakening that goes beyond something that can be studied and memorized. In other words it involves a deep scholarly knowledge and also a deeply personal struggle with meaning and response. The latter perhaps goes beyond "mere logic," but to say koans and zen stories entirely lack an inner structure pointing to realization and are a kind of "nonsense therapy" is also overly simplistic.
"One should cultivate contemplation in one’s foibles. The foibles are like fish, and contemplation is like fishing hooks. If there are no fish, then the fishing hooks have no use. The bigger the fish is, the better the result we will get. As long as the fishing hooks keep at it, all foibles will eventually be contained and controlled at will." -Zhiyi

"Just be kind." -Atisha
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by Astus »

Perhaps using the dichotomy of "rational" and "irrational" (in English) is too much and it can lead to unwanted paths. Better go with in/comprehensible for mu/rie 無/理會 (as in Bielefeldt's translation), as the point is that merely not thinking is not a solution, and that mistake is what is being criticised. As for a modern example of treating Zen teachings, Okumura writes in his commentary to the Mountains and Waters Sutra:

'if we can follow the thread of the teachings from Buddha through Mahāyāna Buddhism and Zen until Dōgen, we can discover the meaning of this wondrous writing for ourselves. We will completely miss the point if we simply read Dōgen and create a fixed philosophy based on our understanding of his writings. If we do that, we create another system of views — another problem. Instead, when we read Dōgen we have to apply his words in our lives, studying the relationship between our self and the myriad things.'
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
User avatar
FiveSkandhas
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by FiveSkandhas »

:good:
"One should cultivate contemplation in one’s foibles. The foibles are like fish, and contemplation is like fishing hooks. If there are no fish, then the fishing hooks have no use. The bigger the fish is, the better the result we will get. As long as the fishing hooks keep at it, all foibles will eventually be contained and controlled at will." -Zhiyi

"Just be kind." -Atisha
NoEssentialNature
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 7:10 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by NoEssentialNature »

Steven Heine is a Dogen scholar, and I found his 'Opening a Mountain: Koans of the Zen Masters' https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/126 ... a_Mountain very interesting in this context.

He covers the origins of the koan tradition in the Transmission Of The Lamp genre of lineage transmissions to the patriarchs of Zen. And identifies many of the stories from the early flourishing of Zen with encounters with spiritual practicioners in the mountains, like hermits & Wuist shamans. This helps understand layers to these discourses, and the way in which Zen came to it's distinctive approach.

I understand not all Buddhists are fabs if Heine, though.
Brunelleschi
Posts: 465
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by Brunelleschi »

FiveSkandhas wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:33 am First of all, koans are not nonsensical. They often contain references that do not translate well into English, and involve wordplay based on classical Chinese allusions. As a simple example, here is a famous interaction:
Question: Why did Bodhidharma come to China?
Answer: Three pounds of flax.
The English translation often begins and ends there, and this is a frequently given example of the "nonsensical" or "illogical" nature of koans and Zen dialogue. However, what is not translated (and what would be known to both the questioner and respondant) is that it took 3 pounds of flax to make a certain classical style of Buddhist robe. Suddenly the answer deepens. It is not just about flax; it is also about Buddhist robes. The question takes on a multivalent aspect: does it refer to the propagation of Buddhism? The meaningless of robes as mere symbols? The meaningfulness of robes in Bodhidharma's cross-cultural pollination? Something else? What exactly is going on here? I am not qualified to say more, but it is worth noting that several layers of meaning are being sifted through here, and more than a mere "shocking, meaningless statement" is at play.
This was great - thanks for sharing.
User avatar
Svalaksana
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:11 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by Svalaksana »

Thanks for the exposition, FiveSkandhas, that was very interesting.

By the way, I might be wrong, but haven't you mixed the question in that interaction? At least I remember that specific reply from Master Tozan followed instead the question "What is the Buddha" in the Mumonkan?
Looking but not seeing - that's my eye.
Thinking but not minding - that's my mind.
Speaking but not expressing - that's my tongue.
Traveling but not going - that's my path.
User avatar
FiveSkandhas
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by FiveSkandhas »

Manjushri wrote: Tue Dec 08, 2020 9:39 pm Thanks for the exposition, FiveSkandhas, that was very interesting.

By the way, I might be wrong, but haven't you mixed the question in that interaction? At least I remember that specific reply from Master Tozan followed instead the question "What is the Buddha" in the Mumonkan?
I apologise...I believe you are correct. I should have verified better.
"One should cultivate contemplation in one’s foibles. The foibles are like fish, and contemplation is like fishing hooks. If there are no fish, then the fishing hooks have no use. The bigger the fish is, the better the result we will get. As long as the fishing hooks keep at it, all foibles will eventually be contained and controlled at will." -Zhiyi

"Just be kind." -Atisha
User avatar
KeithA
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."

Post by KeithA »

FiveSkandhas wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:33 am It is often said that koans and zen stories are "beyond rational thought" and intended to "shock" the seeker into some kind of non-rational state. I take Dogen at his literal word in denouncing this simplistic misunderstanding.

First of all, koans are not nonsensical. They often contain references that do not translate well into English, and involve wordplay based on classical Chinese allusions. As a simple example, here is a famous interaction:
Question: Why did Bodhidharma come to China?
Answer: Three pounds of flax.
The English translation often begins and ends there, and this is a frequently given example of the "nonsensical" or "illogical" nature of koans and Zen dialogue. However, what is not translated (and what would be known to both the questioner and respondant) is that it took 3 pounds of flax to make a certain classical style of Buddhist robe. Suddenly the answer deepens. It is not just about flax; it is also about Buddhist robes. The question takes on a multivalent aspect: does it refer to the propagation of Buddhism? The meaningless of robes as mere symbols? The meaningfulness of robes in Bodhidharma's cross-cultural pollination? Something else? What exactly is going on here? I am not qualified to say more, but it is worth noting that several layers of meaning are being sifted through here, and more than a mere "shocking, meaningless statement" is at play.

Traditionally trained Zen clerics struggle with koans on a deeply personal level: I am not suggesting the exercise is one of mere learned word-play. But koan study also involves the study of classical Chinese, of commentaries on koans, and the selection of "capping phrases" from manuals of classical expression. I hold it involves a kind of jousting and highly learned word-play, although the essence of the matter also necessitates personal response and awakening that goes beyond something that can be studied and memorized. In other words it involves a deep scholarly knowledge and also a deeply personal struggle with meaning and response. The latter perhaps goes beyond "mere logic," but to say koans and zen stories entirely lack an inner structure pointing to realization and are a kind of "nonsense therapy" is also overly simplistic.
Great post! I recently learned that the “cake” in case 77 of the Blue Cliff Record is actually a type of sesame flatbread, according to one author. I always pictured a piece of frosted birthday cake! Those details do help put better context on things.

Of course, knowing “cake” is actually a sesame flatbread, or that “three pounds of flax” is the amount needed to make a robe, isn’t at all important when actually taking up the koan. It does make one sound smart though! :twothumbsup:

_/|\_
Keith
When walking, standing, sitting, lying down, speaking,
being silent, moving, being still.
At all times, in all places, without interruption - what is this?
One mind is infinite kalpas.

New Haven Zen Center
Post Reply

Return to “Zen”