Results 1 to 42 of 42

Thread: BOOK OF EQUANIMITY - Case 52

  1. #1

    BOOK OF EQUANIMITY - Case 52

    Case 51 never ends, yet we turn to Case 52 ... Sozan's Dharmakaya ...

    https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=...donkey&f=false

    Dharmakaya might be said to be reality in its most ultimate sense, beyond subject and object, all individual people and things, coming and going and all birth and death ... so ultimate in fact that we dare not even put a name on it (even "it" or "Dharmakaya"!) for to do so is just to limit. This is what we are too. As the Preamble says, "comparisons cannot be made, and when it is impossible to find something similar or identical, how can it be expressed?" And as well, this Dharmakaya is precisely all people and things, you and me too.

    The image of the moon in the water reminds me of this most beautiful image painted by Dogen in his Genjo Koan ...

    Enlightenment is like the moon reflected on the water. The moon does not get wet, nor is the water broken. Although its light is wide and great, the moon is reflected even in a puddle an inch wide. The whole moon and the entire sky are reflected in dewdrops on the grass, or even in one drop of water.
    Enlightenment does not divide you, just as the moon does not break the water. You cannot hinder enlightenment, just as a drop of water does not hinder the moon in the sky. The depth of the drop is the height of the moon. Each reflection, however long or short its duration, manifests the vastness of the dewdrop, and realizes the limitlessness of the moonlight in the sky.
    http://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachin...GenjoKoan8.htm
    As to the Donkey and the Well (probably the image is the donkey seeing his own self in the well water), I believe there is some play here on the fact that you might realize that "you are the Dharmakaya", but do you realize that "the Dharmakaya is precisely you"? Better said (because, in Zen speak, that is still "only 80%"), what "you" and what "Dharmakaya" (because even thinking in such way creates the image of two things). As well, each drop of water (of which you are one) holds comfortably and fully expresses the entire moon!

    Thus, for example, the Heart Sutra chants, "form is no other than emptiness, emptiness no other than form. Form is exactly emptiness, emptiness exactly form." The Sufi mystic Kabir taught, "All know that the drop merges into the ocean, but few know that the ocean merges into the drop.” Dogen also spoke in the Genjo ...

    To carry the self forward and illuminate myriad things is delusion. That myriad things come forth and illuminate the self is awakening. ... To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly. When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. At the moment when dharma is correctly transmitted, you are immediately your original self.
    I am not sure, but probably the images in the closing Verse of "loom threads don't hang" and "patterns emerge every which way" means something like every thread and pattern (of which you and I are two) of the rug are just the rug, and the rug is precisely its threads and patterns. Since the threads are precisely the rug, and rug just threads ... and this rug is an ongoing work in progress, with threads constantly being added (birth) and replaced on the loom ... though a thread may break (death) this rug stretches boundlessly on and on ... and all is precisely who you and I are all along ...

    SUGGESTED QUESTION:

    Do you feel like the donkey or the well, the moon or the water?


    Gassho, J


    The donkey looks at (its reflection in) the well
    The well looks at the Donkey
    Last edited by Jundo; 05-23-2016 at 01:16 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post

    SUGGESTED QUESTION:

    Do you feel like the donkey or the well, the moon or the water?

    Not sure. But it reminds me of Kennedy's inauguration speech - "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country."

    Am I the country or is the country me? Both. Yet the country is the earth and the earth the universe and the universe the Big Bang and what's before the Big Bang? Where did it come from? I am from. This from has words that can get you here but no further. This is the source. The well that swallows the donkey and itself.

    Just ramblings.

    Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

  3. #3
    "Do you feel like the donkey or the well, the moon or the water?"

    Hello,

    Yes.


    Gassho
    Myosha sat today
    "Recognize suffering, remove suffering." - Shakyamuni Buddha when asked, "Uhm . . .what?"

  4. #4
    First thought so far is regarding the Preface, while letting the rest sink in a bit. When you can't use analogy or simile, how can something be expressed? That is why it is difficult to verbalize thoughts about these Koans, since it seems like the very nature of communication from "me" to "you" necessitates separation. Explaining something inevitably involves comparisons. I have noticed this sometimes when my children ask me to define something with which they have no basis yet to compare, and I am at a loss if I cannot find an analogy that they can understand. Yet, I see children (and animals) "get" things that apparently need no verbal explanation.

    Gassho,
    Jakuden
    SatToday

  5. #5
    The well that swallows the donkey and itself.



    As with a lot of koans, I understand this, but not well enough to express it in my own words. Thank you for the image, Jundo. I have printed this out and stuck it on the wall while I keep company with this case.

    I wonder if the weft and warp of the rug are another metaphor for the interplay of emptiness and form, like the box and its lid from sandokai?


    Sitting donkey
    rivers of thought slowly
    become the ocean.


    Gassho
    Kokuu
    #sattoday
    Last edited by Kokuu; 05-23-2016 at 02:10 PM.

  6. #6
    Eishuu
    Guest
    I feel like the donkey, but sometimes the well starts to wake up or the donkey starts to wake up to the well.

    I really love this koan. Just had an initial reading so will keep contemplating it over the coming days.

    Gassho
    Lucy
    sat today

  7. #7
    Hello friends,

    Am I the donkey or the well or the moon....am I all of these things, I must be.

    Gassho,
    John

  8. #8
    (side question: Jundo have you ever given a talk about the three "kayas"?)
    Thanks,
    Kaishin (開心, Open Heart)
    Please take this layman's words with a grain of salt.

  9. #9
    Jundo, what does equanimity exactly--I've looked it up, and I'm still unsure--felling intense sensations today--will sit in Shikantaza again perhaps from Saturday evening!

    Tai Shi

    Calm Poetry

    sat this morning

    Gassho and deep bows!
    Peaceful Poet, Tai Shi. Ubasoku; calm, supportive, limited to positive 優婆塞 台 婆

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaishin View Post
    (side question: Jundo have you ever given a talk about the three "kayas"?)
    Every talk (and silence) is the three "kayas"!

    For those who don't know what is a "kaya", this is the theory of three "bodies" of the Buddha (like Father, Son and Holy Ghost? ) ) that developed in Mahayana Buddhism early on (although with roots in earlier Buddhism). In a nutshell:

    - The Nirmāṇakāya is the flesh and blood buddha(s) who periodically manifest in the world, including historical Shakyamuni who was born and died in old India some 2500 years ago.

    - The Dharmakāya the subject (beyond subject or object) of today's Koan might be called "Big B Buddha" beyond all names, characteristics and categories, including even place and time and birth and death ... even names like "Buddha".

    - A bit later in the history of Mahayana Buddhism, there developed a third category, the Sambhogakāya, which might be described as Buddhas and their emanations residing in heavens and various ethereal realms in most idealized and romantic and miraculous form ... often the image depicted in art and old Sutra stories with super powers and amazing qualities and magic appearances far beyond ordinary folks ... our amazing saints and godlike Buddhas and the Bodhisattva manifestations. It is what any religion does when it takes its human founders and symbols and dips them in gold and writes incredible mythical stories about their natures. (Even our descriptions of the "historical Buddha" tends to head in such a miraculous and idealized direction in most of our literature).

    I myself am mostly inspired by the "flesh and blood, in this world, sometimes had health problems or disappointments in life, bozos on the bus like the rest of us" human Nirmāṇakāya buddhas who were people who inspired with wise teachings and excellent qualities (although just people nonetheless) ... and the beyond all categories and divisions Dharmakaya which one knows beyond and right through this world (as this Koan demonstrates, this world and "Big B" are "not two" separate things) ...

    ... and I am not so much about Sambhogakāya as actual beings, although I honor such images as powerful symbols, heroes and myths (in the Joseph Campbell way as symbols and reminders for our aspirations and what we might target as heroic symbols of who human beings might ideally aim to be) of the best of human qualities, hopes and aspirations. We need heroes, symbols and stories to inspire and capture our dreams. Most conservative Buddhists would tend to take the fantastic qualities of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas as more literal and undeniable fact, much in the way that people of any religion ... Christians about the divinity, miracles and continued presence of Jesus, for example ... do in any faith. In my perspective, even our "fictional" heroes have powers to touch us, to point us to some Truth that they symbolize, to be manifestations of something within us and in this universe that we try to capture through such images. Thus, even our "heroes" and fantastic stories (whether it is Amida Buddha in his Pure Land or Luke Skywalker and the Jedi) are real as real can be in that way.

    If I were to offer a talk on the Kayas, I would basically say just that.

    You can read more about little more about the Kayas here ...

    http://buddhism.about.com/od/mahayan...he-Trikaya.htm

    ... and examples of more literal interpretations of Sambhogakāya and the others (although they are said to be not separate ultimately) ... and also some attempts to make the more fantastic elements relevant for modern folks ...

    http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia...he_Three_Kayas

    http://www.dharmanet.org/coursesM/Sh...oShinshu1e.htm

    http://www.lionsroar.com/three-in-on...dhist-trinity/

    Probably more history of the three than anyone needs, but Buddhist history wonks please read a few pages from "the system develops" here ...

    https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=...0model&f=false

    Gassho, J

    SatToday
    Last edited by Jundo; 05-24-2016 at 03:40 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post

    Do you feel like the donkey or the well, the moon or the water?
    Thank you very much for the short discussion, Jundo. And for the great commentary, All.

    I think there is no need to distinguish between any of these entities since to do so is to fall into the 80%. This 80% seems to be the "world" of concepts. In this sense, Sozan too falls into the 80% along with Toku, since they are in effect saying the same thing. The donkey seeing the well, is merely the donkey making a particular distinction of the dharmakaya in front of him (i.e., well, water, self-reflection, bricks, etc.). The well too sees the donkey in as much as the donkey's reflection on water is also a formless construction of the dharmakaya that appears before it. Also, even if the donkey is not looking down the well, but just looking at it, the well too is seeing it. Both donkey and well/moon and water, construct a reflection of the dharmakaya in front of them, and by constructing this reflection, distinguish that "Thusness" as a particular object. But like all objects (human/nonhuman; living/nonliving; natural/constructed), they are only constituted as objects in relation to other objects.

    It is this relational aspect that is the other 20%, in my view. That is, the 80% is the understanding that all objects see other objects, for to do so is to give the object (observer and observed) their objectness. Here we are dealing with distinctions and concepts. The 20% is the ongoing impermanent action of seeing (observing)--like a boiling pot of water: when there are bubbles, they are only there because we distinguish it as such. But it is just hot water. When bubbles push other bubbles out of the way, they are "seeing" each other, since one bubble doesn't necessarily exist as something other to its "waterness" (dharmakaya). Likewise, the air in the bubbles only appear as something else in relation to the water, and so on. Therefore, these two bubbles only exist as two bubbles because they appear to be such in relation to each other, not in their larger dharmakaya (waterness).

    The preface to case 52 states that people can learn by parable or analogy, but how can something be expressed for which there isn't any identical similarity. I think this is slightly (and purposefully) misleading, since there is a suggestion that things need to be expressed conceptually (as I did above--80%). "Expression" carries a double meaning. When we fall into concepts, there is no escaping the pigeonholing of the universe into degrees of difference and separation. This is what concepts do (one form of expression). On the other hand, when things are identically similar, it is hard to distinguish between them (i.e., where do I end, and you begin). This is to say, the real question is, how do seemingly dissimilar entities express themselves? This is not a conceptual question but a "performative" question. They express each other in the act of seeing each other.

    That is expression is expressed via relations, not as something inherent to any particular object.

    Thank you all.

    Gassho.

    WillSitToday
    Last edited by Jwroberts27; 05-24-2016 at 04:04 AM.

  12. #12
    Good morning friends,

    A great answer above, particularly ' they express each other IN THE ACT of seeing each other ' this relates directly, to me, to the interconnectedness of all phenomena, how we all flow through and into each other and how our interactions cause an arising, a falling, a dissolution and a construction.

    Great!

    Gassho,
    J

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by John Mac View Post
    Good morning friends,

    A great answer above, particularly ' they express each other IN THE ACT of seeing each other ' this relates directly, to me, to the interconnectedness of all phenomena, how we all flow through and into each other and how our interactions cause an arising, a falling, a dissolution and a construction.

    Great!

    Gassho,
    J


    Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

  14. #14
    Jwroberts, I like what you say a lot but wonder in this case if the donkey and well are symbolic of objects and the dharmakaya respectively?

    In this instance, the donkey looking at the well is us as individual forms, recognising our empty/dharmakaya aspect (the 80%). The well looking at the donkey occurs when we realise our lack of separation from everything else, we are the dharmakaya, the ocean, the well. From this perspective we are the eyes of the universe looking at the world of form (the missing 20%).

    The former (donkey looking at the well) is something I have experienced a great deal, the well looking at the donkey, not so much, although this koan has definitely softened my edges and lowered me part way into the water.

    Looking deep into the well
    I am swallowed whole
    Rising from the depths
    The bray of a donkey.



    Gassho
    Kokuu
    #sattoday
    Last edited by Kokuu; 05-24-2016 at 01:16 PM.

  15. #15
    Thank you, Jundo.
    Thanks,
    Kaishin (開心, Open Heart)
    Please take this layman's words with a grain of salt.

  16. #16
    While out walking and thinking about the question, the answer seemed at that time to be, "I am the road."

    Gassho, sat today
    求道芸化 Kyūdō Geika
    I am just a priest-in-training, please do not take anything I say as a teaching.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Kokuu View Post
    Jwroberts, I like what you say a lot but wonder in this case if the donkey and well are symbolic of objects and the dharmakaya respectively?

    In this instance, the donkey looking at the well is us as individual forms, recognising our empty/dharmakaya aspect (the 80%). The well looking at the donkey occurs when we realise our lack of separation from everything else, we are the dharmakaya, the ocean, the well. From this perspective we are the eyes of the universe looking at the world of form (the missing 20%).


    The former (donkey looking at the well) is something I have experienced a great deal, the well looking at the donkey, not so much, although this koan has definitely softened my edges and lowered me part way into the water.

    Looking deep into the well
    I am swallowed whole
    Rising from the depths
    The bray of a donkey.



    Gassho
    Kokuu
    #sattoday

    Kokuu, thanks very much for the comment and the poem!

    I see your point, and I feel that you are correct, but I also feel that this is only part of the equation. Indeed, I understand the view that the donkey is analogous to us, and the well, analogous to the dharmakaya. But I also feel that we are only making this distinction because we identify more with a fellow mammal, than with a man-made structure. I think this is one example of conceptual separation that needs to be shed. I agree that the donkey is engaging its 80% upon the well's 20% (upon realizing our interconnectedness). But the well too, is the 80% engaging the 20% of the donkey. I think that when we see this, we realize we are not just a Being looking outward upon the universe (80%), but we are also the universe (20%). In this sense, the well is only 80% in so far as it is regarded as separate from the donkey. We could also say that the well is analogous to a human who sees themselves as an autonomous entity that can reflect upon and retain what the universe has to offer (80%), while the donkey represents an entity with reactionary responses to its environment (20%). I think to suggest one over the other is to fall into a conceptual trap (as I may be doing right now!)

    That is, in this anecdotal context, the well and the donkey complete each other 100%, so to speak, because they just are, in relation to each other, as well as manifestations of the same truth. At that moment in time, under the moonlight, well, donkey, water, moon, and everything else constitute the dharmakayan circuit.

    The way I see it, the well and the donkey are not at all different: both are manifestations of actions in the world (i.e., procreation or brick-building), both consist of the elements (i.e., chemical) that are already present in the universe; both have taken on a particular form; and both are impermanent as forms.

    I also think we tend to see "seeing" as something solely reserved for eyesight and cognitive comprehension. I think this is a continuation of our human-centered tendencies. Perhaps it is better (in my view) to see "seeing" as a relation between objects (human or nonhuman). In the same way that the donkey "sees" the well, so does the well see the donkey, as does a boulder "see" a well, when an earthquake dislodges it from a mountain and it comes crashing into the weathered brick structure. Birth and death are a matter of impermanent relations (events of seeing), whether they are done with an intention (80%) or not (100%).

    Thanks again, Kokuu. I appreciate the discussion!

    Gassho
    John
    SatToday

  18. #18
    The deeper I look into the well,
    the more my own shadow gets in my way.

    Gassho,
    Kotei sattoday.

    義道 冴庭 / Gidō Kotei.
    Being a novice priest doesn't mean my writing about the Dharma is more substantial than yours. Actually, it might well be the other way round.

  19. #19
    Member FaithMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Southern California
    It's like the student seeing the teacher.
    "One robe, one bowl."

    FaithMoon
    st

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwroberts27 View Post
    Kokuu, thanks very much for the comment and the poem!

    I see your point, and I feel that you are correct, but I also feel that this is only part of the equation. Indeed, I understand the view that the donkey is analogous to us, and the well, analogous to the dharmakaya. But I also feel that we are only making this distinction because we identify more with a fellow mammal, than with a man-made structure. I think this is one example of conceptual separation that needs to be shed. I agree that the donkey is engaging its 80% upon the well's 20% (upon realizing our interconnectedness). But the well too, is the 80% engaging the 20% of the donkey. I think that when we see this, we realize we are not just a Being looking outward upon the universe (80%), but we are also the universe (20%). In this sense, the well is only 80% in so far as it is regarded as separate from the donkey. We could also say that the well is analogous to a human who sees themselves as an autonomous entity that can reflect upon and retain what the universe has to offer (80%), while the donkey represents an entity with reactionary responses to its environment (20%). I think to suggest one over the other is to fall into a conceptual trap (as I may be doing right now!)

    That is, in this anecdotal context, the well and the donkey complete each other 100%, so to speak, because they just are, in relation to each other, as well as manifestations of the same truth. At that moment in time, under the moonlight, well, donkey, water, moon, and everything else constitute the dharmakayan circuit.

    The way I see it, the well and the donkey are not at all different: both are manifestations of actions in the world (i.e., procreation or brick-building), both consist of the elements (i.e., chemical) that are already present in the universe; both have taken on a particular form; and both are impermanent as forms.

    I also think we tend to see "seeing" as something solely reserved for eyesight and cognitive comprehension. I think this is a continuation of our human-centered tendencies. Perhaps it is better (in my view) to see "seeing" as a relation between objects (human or nonhuman). In the same way that the donkey "sees" the well, so does the well see the donkey, as does a boulder "see" a well, when an earthquake dislodges it from a mountain and it comes crashing into the weathered brick structure. Birth and death are a matter of impermanent relations (events of seeing), whether they are done with an intention (80%) or not (100%).

    Thanks again, Kokuu. I appreciate the discussion!

    Gassho
    John
    SatToday
    My only caution about such descriptions is not to forget the music when talking and thinking about music.

    Suppose one were to be discussing whether an individual note is jazz music, or whether a jazz listener is the music: We could talk about how the whole song consists of individual notes, yet also discuss how each individual note holds the whole song. Or, we might discuss how the listener hears the song, yet also how the song hears the listener! We could speak about whether the music is the Dharmakaya and the notes and the listener are the individual things, or just a whole in which player, played and ear flow into each other together with the sax and piano and drums, the room and waiters and jazz club parking lot, and the whole world.

    However, if one merely has an intellectual discussion about jazz music, one may forget to experience being truly the music. Pulling apart and reconstructing Jazz music in words, and thinking about the relationship of notes and and tempo and instruments and audience, risks losing the actual music. In other words, Zen Wisdom is to be experienced, not merely discussed and dissected philosophically. One must really feel this and be this, man, lose and find oneself in the wild syncopation, not just analyze it. That would be my main caution, to me and everyone, about discussing this Jazzin Zen.

    One must truly grock down to the soul that a donkey listens to the well, the well hears the donkey.


    and for folks who are more classic than jazz ...


    Is this Christian pop? Anyway, the lyrics are really REALLY nice ... you are the well that never runs dry ...


    Gassho, J

    SatToday
    Last edited by Jundo; 05-26-2016 at 12:50 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Is this Christian pop? Anyway, the lyrics are really REALLY nice ... you are the well that never runs dry ...

    Gassho, J

    SatToday
    I do believe the "you" in that song is referring to Jesus, not one's self
    Thanks,
    Kaishin (開心, Open Heart)
    Please take this layman's words with a grain of salt.

  22. #22
    And the Man in the rain
    Picked up his bag of secrets,
    And journeyed up the mountainside
    Far above the clouds;
    And nothing was ever heard from him again

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    My only caution about such descriptions is not to forget the music when talking and thinking about music.

    Suppose one were to be discussing whether an individual note is jazz music, or whether a jazz listener is the music: We could talk about how the whole song consists of individual notes, yet also discuss how each individual note holds the whole song. Or, we might discuss how the listener hears the song, yet also how the song hears the listener! We could speak about whether the music is the Dharmakaya and the notes and the listener individual things, or just a whole in which player, played and ear flow into each other together with the sax and piano and drums, the room and waiters and parking lot, and the whole world.

    However, if one merely has an intellectual discussion about jazz music, one may forget to experience being truly the music. Pulling apart and reconstructing Jazz music in words, and thinking about the relationship of notes and and tempo and instruments and audience, risks losing the actual music. In other words, Zen Wisdom is to be experienced, not merely discussed and dissected philosophically. One must really feel this and be this, man, lose and find oneself in the wild syncopation, not just analyze it. That would be my main caution, to me and everyone, about discussing this Jazzin Zen.

    One must truly grock down to the soul that a donkey listens to the well, the well hears the donkey.
    Thanks for the response, Jundo. Easy to get carried away (a jazzy experience in its own right)!

    Gassho,
    John
    SatToday

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaishin View Post
    I do believe the "you" in that song is referring to Jesus, not one's self
    Oh, that is for sure. I did not know the singer until today, but found out she is big on the Christian scene.

    However, I am also reminded of this other song ... especially when we are speaking of the Dharmakaya, which is beyond all names and characteristics, whether Kaishin or Jundo, Jesus or Jehovah, God or Goofy, Buddha or Basketball or Bob or Big Bang or Bababa ... even "Dharmakaya" ...



    Different names and images and doorways to the Gateless Gate.

    Gassho, J
    Last edited by Jundo; 05-26-2016 at 12:54 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  25. #25
    Mp
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Different names and images and doorways to the Gateless Gate.
    So true! =)

    Gassho
    Shingen

    s@today

  26. #26

    BOOK OF EQUANIMITY - Case 52

    Quote Originally Posted by Jundo View Post
    Do you feel like the donkey or the well, the moon or the water?
    I think that there are a lot of answers to this question.

    On the one hand, I am clearly not a donkey, a well, the moon or the water. So how could I feel like any of them?

    On the other, the donkey, well, moon and water could not exist without me. Without me they cannot be appreciated. They exist because I exist. But if they did not exist then I would have nothing to compare myself to, so I depend on their existence to be alive. Because this arises, that arises. Because this exists, that exists.

    In Zen we say, not one, not two. Not absolute, not relative. Beyond relative and absolute.


    I think words are abstractions, not true representation of reality. Unless they are just words and not abstractions. A donkey is a donkey. Not short, not tall. Just a donkey. The moon is just the moon, not bright nor dark, not full nor half. Just a moon.

    It pisses me off to no end when words are passed on as the real deal when they are just forgeries. That is why I don't like to write very much and it necessarily causes me to lie when I open my mouth. When my lips move, I am not telling the truth. Yet I am. Complicated.

    But we need to talk to each other because well, we have a well to talk about.

    The donkey does not give a shit about looking at its reflection at the well. It is thirsty and it wants a drink. It's what donkeys do when thirsty. I feel just like a donkey when I am thirsty. I want a drink. The well? The well does not talk. It holds water and it does not care if it is drunk or not. I feel like the well sometimes. Don't feel like talking. Just want to sit and be left alone. Maybe like in Zazen.

    The moon? It sits high in the sky and it does its job regardless as to whether I want to play relative or absolute Zen games. It does not care. Its just there. Same for the water.

    Things are just things. No need to complicate it. A donkey is a donkey, a well a well, a moon a moon and water just water. What about me? Just me. Thats it.

    A Koan is only a Koan. Unless you make it a Koan. If you don't pick up a Koan, it's not yours to solve. Yet I get suckered into them.

    Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_
    Last edited by Jishin; 05-26-2016 at 03:02 AM.

  27. #27
    Still struggling with the koans. However, the Sufi quote in Jundos’ intro let in a ray of light:
    "All know that the drop merges into the ocean, but few know that the ocean merges into the drop.”

    Gassho,
    Marco
    satoday

    PS- In answer to the question, I feel like the donkey, definitely the donkey.
    Last edited by Marco; 05-26-2016 at 10:05 AM.

  28. #28
    The way I see it, the well and the donkey are not at all different: both are manifestations of actions in the world (i.e., procreation or brick-building), both consist of the elements (i.e., chemical) that are already present in the universe; both have taken on a particular form; and both are impermanent as forms.
    if one merely has an intellectual discussion about jazz music, one may forget to experience being truly the music. Pulling apart and reconstructing Jazz music in words, and thinking about the relationship of notes and and tempo and instruments and audience, risks losing the actual music. In other words, Zen Wisdom is to be experienced, not merely discussed and dissected philosophically. One must really feel this and be this, man, lose and find oneself in the wild syncopation, not just analyze it. That would be my main caution, to me and everyone, about discussing this Jazzin Zen.

    Thank you both John and Jundo. I really appreciate hearing what other people get from the koan, as they often offer perspectives I had not considered.

    What I like about koans is how they can open up a different way of experiencing the world. This one certainly had that effect.

    Trying to describe it is certainly not the easiest, though, and runs the risk of over-intellectualising. Maybe the best response is the same as when listening to good jazz.

    "Yeah!"




    Gassho
    Kokuu
    #sattoday

  29. #29
    Member Hoseki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    St. John's Newfoundland, Canada.
    Hi folks,

    I can't say I understand what's going on and that's OK.



    Sat today
    Adam

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Dude View Post
    Hi folks,

    I can't say I understand what's going on and that's OK.



    Sat today
    Adam


    I could say I do understand, but I would probably be either wrong or lying. Something tells me there aren't going to be any Koans about which I will be able to say "Oh, I so totally understand that!!"

    Gassho,
    Jakuden
    SatToday

  31. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakuden View Post


    I could say I do understand, but I would probably be either wrong or lying. Something tells me there aren't going to be any Koans about which I will be able to say "Oh, I so totally understand that!!"

    Gassho,
    Jakuden
    SatToday
    On reason I do use the music analogy often is that it really is something similar. Sometimes we don't "get" Jazz or country music or whatever you first don't "get" ... but then suddenly we get it in the bones!

    Or it is like this (or those darn 3-D pictures they printed in the newspapers for awhile ... took me forever to see, then one day there it was, jumping right off the page!) ... Seeing this, and getting it in ones bones can be a bit tricky. One should not really understand just intellectually, although 'tis hard to really sink in and truly see (that is one reason for all this Sitting and Practice). And once seen, it is known as having always been there. In this way, piercing ths puzzle is very much like the old optical illusion of the young lady and the old crone. Can you see both? (Post here if you can't, and I will give a clue) ...



    Is it an old lady? Is it a young lady? Both at once? YES!! Yes, both are there and depends on being able to see things each way. As well, the open spaces and lines are a single whole ... and there is no drawing at all without both as one.

    So, in Zazen, we "open the hand of divisive thoughts" and realize this whole view.

    If one fails to see through the "little self" and encounter one's True Face Before Even One's Mother & Father Were Born as the "True Self/small self, True Nature, Dharmakhaya, Relative/Absolute, Mu, Emptiness, Shobogenzo, Big 'B' Buddha, Mirror Mind, Capital "M" Mind etc. " ... then one is simply missing one of the central points (perhaps THE Central Point among the many good points) of all Mahayana Buddhist Practice, including Zen Buddhism. One is simply coming to the "Non-Birthday Party" and leaving without eating any Non-Birthday Cake!

    The old adage that "Zen" is about "Becoming One With The Universe" is really not so far off the mark!

    What is more, I propose to you that this is really not so hard to see or understand (even for us with a modern, skeptical mind), although 'tis hard to really sink in and truly see (that is one reason for all this Sitting and Practice). And once seen, it is known as having always been there.

    Thus, for me ... a great skeptic, agnostic, "show me the evidence" guy who doubts UFO's, Big Foot and the Lock Ness Monster ... and who is skeptical of literal, mechanical rebirth as a rat or a ghost (just let what will be just be on that) ... I can still sink my teeth into this view of "Non-Birth", that we were never quite born ... thus we never quite die. It is easy to see and pierce (through Practice), it is easy to grasp intellectually too. My own "Kensho" moments are much like actually having seen the world inside out and rightside up, without self/other separation, the all encompassing interpenetration of all things, where the young lady now is witnessed clearly as the crone through and through, without a drop of separation ... neither displacing or replacing the other. Through this Zen Practice, the hard borders between "my self" and "all the rest" soften, and sometimes fully drop away. Now, with years of practice, I can pretty much access pierce the illusion any time when taking a moment to see ... a way of "I" and "non-I" at once.

    Simply put, it is easy to understand: If you are you ... but you are also simultaneously just the "universe" or (better said) the reality underlying everything ... then, when "you" die you don't really quite die so long as that "reality" is still going, keeping it real. Same for being "born".

    Yes, it is a bit hard to fully fathom. But also as simple as child's play.

    For you and me and the other folks are simply star dust, made of the same stuff as all the planets, trees and bees. We are like these individual finger puppets, stuck in their unique and separate identities ... who cannot see (without Practice) that they are each simultaneously also just the whole hand, and maybe even the little child behind it.



    (What the hand or child is up to, if anything at all? Well, that's a whole 'nother question. Whatever, best to just play along!)

    Basic Mahayana Buddhism, Zen Buddhism 101.

    As is written on the wooden block calling folks to Zazen, and chanted each night in about every Zen monastery anywhere ...

    Let me respectfully remind you
    Life and death are of supreme importance, the Great Matter.
    Time passes swiftly and opportunity is lost.
    Let us awaken ...
    Awaken!
    Do not squander this life.


    Gassho, J

    SatToday

    PS - If you would like more pontificating by me on this subject (and non-subject), here is an old thread ...

    http://www.treeleaf.org/forums/showt...l=1#post121989

    Another traditional simile is that of "waves on the sea". A wave arises on the surface of the sea for a time, rolls along, and then disappears back into the sea. If that sea wave were to somehow become conscious and self reflective (like us), it might think "I am separate from the sea and all the other waves, and when I vanish I die." However, from another perspective, a wave is just the sea all along ... no wave apart from the water ... and the wave was never just the wave. The wave was also always the sea, just temporarily arising a certain way under local conditions. So, the wave would be partly right (it will vanish and die when it disappears) but also wrong (because it was the sea along, both before and after never anything else). Science seems to be saying much the same, that each of us is just the same matter and energy, atoms and waves and such as all the rest of the universe.
    PPS - While I was writing this, found these other incredible 3d images ...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...cil-paper.html
    Last edited by Jundo; 05-27-2016 at 03:50 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

  32. #32
    Member Roland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Brussels and Antwerp, Belgium

    BOOK OF EQUANIMITY - Case 52

    Sometimes, not very often, there is 'feeling like the well'. Hard to describe, but 'compassion' comes to mind.

    Gassho
    #SatToday

    Roland

  33. #33
    I read through the koan a few times. It seems that when I try to pin it down with explanations and "word grasping"... the more deluded everything becomes. By sitting, we open ourselves up to the whole picture without any need for descriptions. Recognizing all the elements we drop the well, the moon, the water, the donkey and the reflection to then become aware of pure consciousness.

    Hmm...
    Just my thoughts running on and on...

    Gassho
    Sat2day
    Last edited by Toun; 05-27-2016 at 10:01 PM. Reason: Typos

  34. #34
    I appreciate all of the insights into this koan. Thank you.

    For me I keep coming back to something in the commentary after the reading

    ".... I think the brain is using the scientists in order to understand itself."
    What a unique and correct way of expressing this idea. It helped me with the "the well sees the donkey" part of the koan but more importantly it helps me better understand the "not one" and "not two". The donkey can't see his reflection without the well and the well can not reflect the image without the donkey. They are not separate (not two) but not one either.

    Gassho
    Warren
    sat today

  35. #35
    Member Shurin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Twentynine Palms, California
    I am trying to grasp this on a deeper level. So I guess I would identify as the donkey that can't even see the well yet.

    Gassho
    Shurin
    Sat today

  36. #36
    Who sees either the well or the donkey? Who?

    Gassho
    Meishin
    Sat today

  37. #37

    BOOK OF EQUANIMITY - Case 52

    Quote Originally Posted by Meishin View Post
    Who sees either the well or the donkey? Who?
    Who sees the well and the donkey.








    Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_
    Last edited by Jishin; 05-29-2016 at 01:41 AM.

  38. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by awarren View Post
    I appreciate all of the insights into this koan. Thank you.

    For me I keep coming back to something in the commentary after the reading



    What a unique and correct way of expressing this idea. It helped me with the "the well sees the donkey" part of the koan but more importantly it helps me better understand the "not one" and "not two". The donkey can't see his reflection without the well and the well can not reflect the image without the donkey. They are not separate (not two) but not one either.

    Gassho
    Warren
    sat today
    Thank you Warren! Something about the way you worded your description made me say "ah ha!"

    Marco
    Gassho
    Satoday

  39. #39
    Everyone's responses have been great. I agree with Marco and Warren that Wick's commentary ".... I think the brain is using the scientists in order to understand itself." really helped me to get closer to understanding the well seeing the donkey. Currently, I am the donkey (no 80% about that). I'm ok with being the donkey for now. Really fascinating koan that I will have to keep thinking about.

    Jishin that was hilarious and appropriate

    Quote Originally Posted by Jishin View Post
    Who sees the well and the donkey.



    Gassho,
    Tyler

    SatToday

  40. #40
    Member FaithMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Southern California
    With this koan, the "seeing" aspect has had the strongest resonance for me. As in connection, attention.

  41. #41


    Gassho,
    Onkai
    SatToday

  42. #42
    According to my understanding of the dharmakaya (which means I am already off track), I am the moon and water, donkey and well. But according to Tozan's stages of zen practice, I am not even a donkey yet. Donkey-like events in my life have me pondering some fairly serious existential questions about who/what I am and where I am going, and I spent a large chunk of yesterday pondering these questions until I finally decided that I needed to ponder a more immediate existential crisis in my life, and that was to answer the question of what I was going to do all day besides sit on my ass (donkey) and ponder the great mystery that will reveal itself in due time anyway. So I cleaned the house, and it was good, so good that it was one of the best damn things I have done in a while. I actualized the cleaning products, and they actualized me, and the result was a great cycling of the cosmic dirty/clean wheel. Without the mess, there could have been no cleaning, and without cleaning there is no mess. In this silly analogy, my house is the dhamrakaya manifesting itself in myriad forms. BTW the house is about 80% clean, and when I find the well I will get some water to mop the floors to finish the other 20%. Maybe I will play some jazz while I am at it.
    AL (Jigen) in:
    Faith/Trust
    Courage/Love
    Awareness/Action!

    I sat today

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •