A man sought to attain the “Dao”, so he went to visit a Zen(Chan) master, asking to become his disciple. To test the man’s insight, the master asked:
“Right now, I have something and yet have nothing. How do you explain this?”
The man replied: “Too difficult! May I decline to explain?”
The master said: “No! If you truly wish to attain the Dao, you must find the answer and tell me.”
The man said: “Fine! Is it that from one side you appear to have something, and from the other side, nothing?”
The master said: “Wrong! You’ve missed the point entirely! From the same direction, I both have something and have nothing. How do you explain this?”
The man said: “I give up!”
The master said: “Do not abandon things so easily! You must exhaust all efforts to unravel this mystery.”
The man retorted: “Whether I give up is mine to decide. In fact, I already have. No one can stop me.”
The master said: “Did you not seek the Dao?”
The man said: “If attaining the Dao means agonizing over such a foolish question, forget it.”
Twelve years later, the man returned to the master:
“I’m back, Master. I regret my actions. For twelve years, I wandered, feeling cowardly and impatient. Now I see one cannot escape life—sooner or later, we must face its challenges. I must calm my mind and study the question you gave me.”
The master asked: “What question?”
The man said: “You have something and yet have nothing. How to explain it?”
The master exclaimed: “Did I truly say that? Was I so foolish? How could I have asked such a stupid question?”
Cultural & Philosophical Notes:
The Illusion of Logical Answers
- The “Foolish” Paradox: The master’s question—”I have something and nothing simultaneously”—is intentionally illogical, mimicking Zen koans (like “What is the sound of one hand clapping?”). Its purpose is not to be “solved” but to expose the futility of relying on intellectual reasoning.
- Attachment to Duality: The disciple’s attempts to answer (e.g., “from one side…”) reflect humanity’s obsession with dualistic categories (having vs. lacking, right vs. wrong). The master rejects these, pointing to a truth beyond opposites(non-duality).
Lesson: Truth cannot be captured by language or logic. Zen awakening requires transcending the mind’s addiction to categorization.
The Trap of Spiritual Ambition
- Desire for “Attaining the Dao”: The disciple’s initial goal—to “achieve enlightenment”—becomes an obstacle. His frustration (“If this is what it takes, forget it!”) reveals how ego-driven spiritual ambition breeds impatience and aversion.
- Twelve Years of Wandering: His eventual return symbolizes the inevitability of confronting life’s inherent struggles. True practice begins not in escaping reality but in embracing it.
Lesson: Enlightenment is not a trophy to be won but a natural state obscured by striving. As the master implies, even the concept of “Dao” must be let go.
The Master’s Role: A Mirror of Emptiness
- Dynamic Teaching: The master first insists on an answer, then later denies ever asking the question. This destabilizes the disciple’s reliance on external authority.
- Dissolving the Koan: By calling his own question “stupid,” the master demonstrates that even teachings are provisional tools. The ultimate truth—like the question itself—is empty of inherent meaning(sunyata).
Lesson: A true teacher does not provide answers but dismantles the student’s illusions, including dependency on the teacher.
Surrender as Awakening
- Initial “Giving Up”: The disciple’s first abandonment is reactive and resentful, rooted in ego.
- Final Letting Go: When the master invalidates the question, the disciple is forced to confront the emptiness of all conceptual frameworks. True surrender is not quitting but releasing attachments—even to “enlightenment.”
Lesson: Freedom arises not from solving life’s paradoxes but from dissolving the need to solve them.
Leave a Reply