Essays in Zen Buddhism : $b First seriesSuzuki, Daisetz Teitaro
Religion
Essays in Zen Buddhism : $b First series
Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro
Zen Buddhism
A monk asked Jōshu (Chao-chou Tsung-shên, 778–897) to be instructed
in Zen. Said the master, “Have you had your breakfast or not?” “Yes,
master, I have,” answered the monk. “If so, have your dishes washed,”
was an immediate response, which, it is said, at once opened the monk’s
mind to the truth of Zen.
This is enough to show what a commonplace thing satori is; but to
see what an important rôle this most trivial incident of life plays
in Zen, it will be necessary to add some remarks which were made by
the masters, and through these the reader may have a glimpse into
the content of satori. Ummon (Yün-mên, Wên-yen, died 949) who lived
a little later than Jōshu commented on him; “Was there any special
instruction in the remark of Jōshu, or not? If there was, what was it?
If there was not, what satori was it that the monk attained?” Later,
Umpo Monyetsu (Yün-fêng Wen-yüeh, 997–1062) made a retort, saying, “The
great master Ummon does not know what is what, hence this comment of
his. It was altogether unnecessary, it was like painting legs to the
snake and growing a beard to the eunuch. My view differs from his: that
monk who seems to have attained a satori goes to hell as straight as an
arrow!”[5.10]
Now, what does this all mean—Jōshu’s remark about washing the dishes,
the monk’s attainment of satori, Ummon’s alternatives, and Monyetsu’s
assurance? Are they speaking against each other? Is this much ado about
nothing? This is where Zen is difficult to grasp and at the same time
difficult to explain. Let me add a few more queries. How did Jōshu make
the monk’s eye open by such a prosaic remark? Did the remark have any
hidden meaning, however, which happened to coincide with the mental
tone of the monk? How was the monk so mentally prepared for the final
stroke of the master whose service was just pressing the button as it
were? Nothing of satori is so far gleaned from washing the dishes;
we have to look somewhere else for the truth of Zen. At any rate,
we could not say that Jōshu had nothing to do with the monk’s
realisation. Hence Ummon’s remark which is somewhat enigmatic, yet to
the point. As to Monyetsu’s comment, it is what is technically known
as _Nenro_,[5.11] “handling and playing,” or “playful criticism.” He
appears to be making a disparaging remark about Ummon, but in truth he
is joining hands with his predecessors.
Tokusan (Teh-shan Hsüan-chien, 779–865)[5.12] was a great scholar of
the _Diamond Sutra_ (_Vajracchedikā_). Learning that there was such a
thing as Zen ignoring all the written scriptures and directly laying
hand on one’s soul, he came to Ryutan (Lung-t‘an) to be instructed in
the doctrine. One day Tokusan was sitting outside trying to see into
the mystery of Zen. Ryutan said, “Why don’t you come in?” Replied
Tokusan, “It is pitch dark.” A candle was lighted and handed over
to Tokusan. When the latter was at the point of taking it, Ryutan
suddenly blew the light out, whereupon the mind of Tokusan was
opened.[f108][5.13]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account