RE: [spoon-discuss] RE: [Spoon-business] CFI 1748

[Zarpint Jeremy Cook <mcfoufou@xxxxxxxxx>]

No, actually. That commentary explains exactly why Joshu answered "no".
Asking the question, or worrying about answering it, is stupid - so he just said
"no". He didn't make up some word "mu" and "unask" the question. He dared to say
"no". He answered, because a word doesn't matter.

Look at the following translation:

Has a dog the Buddha nature?
This is a matter of life and death.
If you wonder whether a dog has it or not,
You certainly lose your body and life!

Joshu didn't wonder or care.

But "mu" is the Chinese word for "no", so regardless of interpretation of a Zen koan,
your answer should be taken to mean "no", just as "nein" would.

Zarpint
The Style Police




On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Craig wrote:

> >Contrary to unsupported claims by Hofstadter, "mu" actually means "no", or
> "without".
> >In the Joshu koan, Joshu answers the question, "Does a Dog have
> Buddha-nature" with
> >the answer "No."
>
> >Thus this judgement should be rectified to "NO."
>
> That interpretation ignores the commentary: "Does a dog have Buddha nature?
> This is the most serious question of all. If you answer yes or no, you lose
> your own Buddha nature."
>
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>

-- 
Zarpint            "All thy toiling only breeds new dreams, new dreams;
Jeremy Cook         there is no truth saving in thine own heart."
mcfoufou@xxxxxxxxx       --W.B. Yeats, The Song of the Happy Shepherd
grep -r kibo /     "Movements are the problem, not the answer to problems."
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss