AN ANALYSIS OF THE K�ANS IN THE MU MON KWAN

Introduction

This paper attempts something which at first might seem unusual, that is, to analyze a collection of Zen k6ans. According to some scholars of Zen, the k6an "cannot be understood by logic; it cannot be transmitted in words; it cannot be explained in writing; it cannot be measured by This seeming contradiction touches upon a basic problem encountered in trying to understand the religious conceptions of another culture. For a religious understanding of k6ans (by Zennists) there is no need for explanation, indeed there is no way a k6an can be analyzed. The intention of the koan is to bring about a state of enlightenment, devoid of conceptualization, beyond the realm of words and even thought. However, for an academic understanding of k6ans we can, and should, analyze them in order for non = Zennists to comprehend their function and purpose in Zen. We shall return to this point a little later, but first let us explain what constitutes a k6an. K6an is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese characters küng án, which mean "public record". These characters were used by Buddhists to signify, " 'a public document setting up a standard of judgement', whereby one's Zen understanding is tested as to its correctness" 2). Theoretically k6ans may take any form, but the most common consists of questions and answers (mondõ; wèn td), stories or statements 3). One of the most famous k6ans is in the form of a mondõ, "The Master Jyõshu was once asked by a monk, 'Has a dog also Buddha-nature or not ? Jyoshu said, 'Mu!'"4) Mu was the character used by Zennists to translate the sanskrit word sunyatd, meaning "emptiness" or "devoid of self-nature". However, even with

1) Ruth F. Sasaki, "The History of the Koan in Renzai (Lin-Chi) Zen". The Zen Koan: Its History and Use in Rinzai Zen. Issh� Miura and Ruth F. Sasaki, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1965 p. 5. 2) D. T. Suzuki, Essays in Zen Buddhism (Second Series), ed. C. Humphreys, New York: Samuel Weiser Inc., 1970, p. 93. 3) Ibid., p. 108. 4) Mumon Ekai, "The Mu Mon Kwan", trans. Sohaku Ogata, in Zen for the West. S. Ogata, New York : Dial Press, 1959, p. 91. 66 this explanation of f >vu,the k6an appears meaningless to non = Zennists, and many seem to think that the "key" to understanding Zen lies in uttering nonsense. Needless to say, this is not the case. For this analysis, we are going to consider koans as means of communicating a particular understanding of reality, the Zen understanding. By means of koans, Zen Masters are able to convey the most important ideas, attitudes and conceptions of Zen Buddhism. "The koans do not rep- resent the private opinion of a single man, but rather the highest principle, received alike by us and by the hundreds and thousands of bodhisattvas of the three realms and the ten directions" 5). If we accept the fact that k6ans were intended to aid in the attain- ment of enlightenment (satori; then we must view them as having a single goal and purpose. However, k6ans appear radically different in form and content; therefore, the problem in analyzing koans lies in discovering the various methods used to achieve the same end. This problem is very similar to the problem faced by students of myth. A group of myths from a given culture appear totally un- related ; however, they are all indicative of a common cultural outlook and it is our problem to understand where the similarities lie, or rather how cultural ideas are communicated through myths. In an attempt to solve this problem, Claude Lévi-Strauss pioneered what is known as the structural study of myth. In this type of analysis, myths are treated as a particular type of language which communicate cultural ideas. As a result of his studies, he has offered the following working hypothesis for analyzing myths:

i) If there is a meaning to be found in mythology, it cannot reside in the isolated elements which enter into the composition of a myth, but only in the way those elements are combined. 2) Although myth belongs to the same category as language, being, as a matter of fact, only part of it, lan- guage in myth exhibits specific properties. 3) Those properties are only to be found above the ordinary linguistic level, that is, they exhibit more complex features than those which are to be found in any other kind of linguistic expression 6).

We can immediately see the similarities in the problems encountered when analyzing myths and koans. 1 ) The meaning in k6ans does

5) Sasaki, p. 5. 6) Claude Lévi-Strauss, "The Structural Study of Myth", Structural Anthro- pology, Garden City : Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1967, p. 206.