’Kyogen said, “It (Zen) is like a man (monk) hanging by his teeth in a tree over a precipice. His hands grasp no branch, his feet rest on no limb, and under the tree another man asks him, ‘Why did Bodhidharma come to China from the West?’ If the man in the tree does not answer, he misses the question, and if he answers, he falls and loses his life. Now what shall he do?” ′
Zen is like a man hanging by his teeth in a tree over a precipice. Sure, his situation may seem interesting, but his real mistake was further upstream.
Shuzan held out his short staff and said, “If you call this a short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now what do you wish to call this?”
I vastly prefer this one, which actually provides an answer to the question (“I refute it thus”):
Hyakujo wished to send a monk to open a new monastery. He told his pupils that whoever answered a question most ably would be appointed. Placing a water vase on the ground, he asked: “Who can say what this is without calling its name?”
The chief monk said: “No one can call it a wooden shoe.”
Isan, the cooking monk, tipped over the vase with his shoe and went out.
Hyakujo smiled and said: “The chief monk loses.” And Isan became the master of the new monastery.
Zen is a matter of life and death:
Zen is like a man hanging by his teeth in a tree over a precipice. Sure, his situation may seem interesting, but his real mistake was further upstream.
Not answer.
I say:
“Of this which is unique and unknown, the short staff predicate is true.”
I vastly prefer this one, which actually provides an answer to the question (“I refute it thus”):
If Pavitra had been there, he could have saved the cat.
If we’re going to take the question literally, which is arguably a mistake in itself, responding with “not answer” is clearly wrong.
The man’s mouth cannot be opened, but his hands are free. Use sign language to answer the question.
Learn sign language.
First, grasp a branch. Then, ask the other man for help.