An Answer in One Word
A monk asks what the Buddha is and gets a sesame cake, a dried stick of dung or a single syllable. Whether such an answer refuses the question or settles it is what the reader has to decide.
Yunmen's replies are short on purpose, and their shortness is the teaching. Asked which of the Buddha's three bodies preaches, he says one word, "Essential"; asked what goes beyond buddhas and patriarchs, he says "Sesame cake", and when the monk protests that this has nothing to do with it, he agrees. An explanation would hand the questioner another idea to hold. The blunt object hands him nothing, and leaves him facing the fact that he went looking for the answer somewhere other than where he stood.
- language
- chan dialogue
- encounter dialogue
- conceptual thought
- language and meaning
- paradox
- koan
- teaching methods
Enter a dialogue
- A monk asks what goes beyond all buddhas and patriarchs, and you say "Sesame cake." Why answer the loftiest question with a snack?
- Asked what the Buddha's body is, you answer "A dried stick of dung." Is that contempt for the Buddha, or something a devout monk needs to hear?
- When a monk protests that your answer has nothing to do with his question, you agree with him. What does agreeing do that arguing could not?
- If your answer is a single word like "Essential" or "Universal", what stops a monk from carrying that word off as a new doctrine?
- Someone will not act until they have the right explanation. What would one of your blunt one-word answers do to a person like that?