The ancient Japanese Zen masters tell a short story;
A monk asked Joshu, “Does a dog have the Buddha nature?” Joshu retorted, “Mu!”
"Mu!" is an answer stating that the question is without meaning; it "unasks" the question, it states "the answer is not defined". It is the answer to "What is ten divided by zero?" and the answer to "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" assuming you've never done so.
I now want to tell a similar, but not identical story - with a similar, but not identical meaning.
A monk asked Joshu, "Does a dog have the Buddha nature?" Joshu retorted, "Lol!"
It has always surprised me that so few philosophers see a value in the whimsical and the random, the comedic and the light-hearted. Just because something is funny, doesn't mean it's not true. It doesn't mean it's not important either. When the answer isn't defined, what you have is ridiculous.
2 kommentarer:
I think the problem is that people seeking wisdom doeas not grow when their questions are met with ridicule.
Well, it depends. If the answer makes you see what a ridiculous question it was, then you probably do grow. If the answer is just making fun of you, then probably not.
Skicka en kommentar