How do we make sense of the inexplicable? This question has fueled countless myths, religious rituals, and scientific pursuits. Yet, Zen Buddhists in China from the 9th to 13th century posed a different question: why do we need explanations at all? For these monks, the relentless quest for answers was a hurdle to overcome, and embracing the mysteries of life was the true path to enlightenment.
Resisting the urge to explain the unexplainable is no easy task. To cultivate comfort with life’s mysteries, Zen monks employed a collection of about 1,700 perplexing and ambiguous philosophical thought experiments known as kōans. The term, originally “gong-an” in Chinese, means “public record or case.” Unlike actual legal cases, kōans were deliberately incomprehensible, often surprising, surreal, and self-contradictory.
On the surface, kōans contained proverbs about the Zen Buddhist monastic code, such as living without attachments, avoiding binary thinking, and realizing one’s true “Buddha-nature.” By presenting these lessons as illogical anecdotes, kōans served as tests to help monks learn to live with ambiguity and paradox. By grappling with these confusing “cases,” meditating monks could internalize and practice Buddhist teachings, ideally letting go of the search for one definitive answer and achieving a spiritual breakthrough.
Since kōans are intentionally unexplainable, trying to decipher them might seem misguided. However, like the monks before us, we can ponder them together and explore how resistant they are to simple explanations.
Consider this kōan about the practice of non-attachment: Two monks, Tanzan and Ekido, are traveling down a muddy road. They encounter a traveler unable to cross the muddy path. Tanzan offers his help, carrying the traveler across the street and setting her down without a word. Ekido is shocked, as monastic law forbids monks from interacting with women, especially in such a manner. After miles of walking, Ekido can no longer hold back. “How could you carry that woman?” he asks. Tanzan smiles, “I left the traveler there. Are you still carrying her?”
This story, like all kōans, has multiple interpretations. One popular reading suggests that although Ekido never physically carried the traveler, he violated monastic law by mentally “clinging to” her. This type of conflict—exploring the gray area between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law—is common in kōans.
In addition to exploring ambiguity, kōans often mocked characters who claimed complete understanding of the world. In one example, three monks debate a temple flag fluttering in the wind. The first monk calls it a moving banner, while the second insists they are witnessing the wind, not the flag. They argue until a third monk interjects, “It is not the flag moving, nor the wind blowing, but rather the movement of your minds!”
This kōan plays on the supposed wisdom of the arguing monks—the first emphasizes the observable world, while the second values deeper knowledge inferred from it. However, each monk’s commitment to his own “answer” blinds him to the other’s insight, contradicting a key Buddhist ideal: abolishing binary thinking. The third monk highlights their conflict as a perceptual one—both arguing monks fail to see the bigger picture.
Ultimately, these interpretations only scratch the surface of how to engage with kōans. Neither the wisdom of past monks nor the supposedly wise characters in these stories can resolve them for you. The purpose of kōans isn’t to find a simple solution. Instead, it’s the very act of wrestling with these paradoxical puzzles that challenges our desire for resolution and deepens our understanding of understanding itself.
Gather in small groups and choose a kōan from the article or another source. Discuss its possible meanings and how it challenges conventional thinking. Focus on how the kōan encourages you to embrace ambiguity and paradox. Share your interpretations with the class, highlighting the diversity of perspectives.
Spend 15 minutes writing a personal reflection on a kōan that resonates with you. Consider how it relates to your own experiences with uncertainty or paradox. Reflect on how engaging with the kōan might influence your approach to problem-solving or decision-making in your academic and personal life.
Create a piece of art, poem, or short story inspired by a kōan. Use your chosen medium to explore the themes of non-attachment, binary thinking, or perceptual challenges. Share your work with classmates and discuss how creative expression can deepen your understanding of kōans.
Engage in a guided meditation session focusing on a kōan. Allow yourself to sit with the kōan without seeking immediate answers. Observe your thoughts and feelings as they arise. After the meditation, discuss how this practice of mindfulness can help you become more comfortable with ambiguity and paradox.
In pairs, role-play a scenario based on a kōan, such as the interaction between Tanzan and Ekido. One student plays a character from the kōan, while the other plays a modern-day counterpart facing a similar dilemma. Explore how the kōan’s lessons apply to contemporary issues, and discuss the insights gained from this exercise.
**Sanitized Transcript:**
How do we explain the unexplainable? This question has inspired numerous myths, religious practices, and scientific inquiries. However, Zen Buddhists practicing throughout China from the 9th to 13th century asked a different question – why do we need an explanation? For these monks, blindly seeking answers was a challenge to overcome, and learning to accept the mysteries of existence was the true path to enlightenment.
Fighting the urge to explain the unexplainable can be difficult. To help practice living with these mysteries, the meditating monks used a collection of roughly 1,700 bewildering and ambiguous philosophical thought experiments called kōans. The name, originally gong-an in Chinese, translates to “public record or case.” Unlike real-world court cases, kōans were intentionally incomprehensible. They were surprising, surreal, and frequently contradicted themselves.
On the surface, they contained proverbs about the Zen Buddhist monastic code, such as living without physical or mental attachments, avoiding binary thinking, and realizing one’s true “Buddha-nature.” By framing those lessons as illogical anecdotes, they became tests to help practicing monks learn to live with ambiguity and paradox. By puzzling through these confusing “cases,” meditating monks could internalize and practice Buddhist teachings, hopefully letting go of the search for one true answer and triggering a spiritual breakthrough.
Since these are intentionally unexplainable, it would be misguided to try and decipher these stories ourselves. However, like the monks before us, we can puzzle over them together and investigate just how resistant they are to simple explanations.
Consider this kōan illustrating the practice of no-attachment: Two monks, Tanzan and Ekido, are traveling together down a muddy road. Ahead, they see an attractive traveler unable to cross the muddy path. Tanzan politely offers his help, carrying the traveler on his back across the street and placing her down without a word. Ekido is shocked. According to monastic law, monks were not supposed to go near women, let alone touch a beautiful stranger. After miles of walking, Ekido could no longer restrain himself. “How could you carry that woman?” Tanzan smiled, “I left the traveler there. Are you still carrying her?”
Like all kōans, this story has numerous interpretations. One popular reading suggests that despite never having physically carried the traveler, Ekido broke monastic law by mentally “clinging to” the woman. This type of conflict – examining the grey area between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law – was common in kōans.
In addition to exploring ambiguity, kōans often ridiculed characters claiming total understanding of the world around them. One such example finds three monks debating a temple flag rippling in the wind. The first monk refers to the flag as a moving banner, while the second monk insists that they are not seeing the flag move, but rather the wind blowing. They argue back and forth until finally, a third monk intervenes, saying, “It is not the flag moving, nor the wind blowing, but rather the movement of your minds!”
One interpretation of this kōan plays on the supposed wisdom of the arguing monks – the first asserting the importance of the observable world, the second favoring deeper knowledge we can infer from that world. However, each monk’s commitment to his own “answer” blinds him to the other’s insight, defying an essential Buddhist ideal: abolishing binary thinking. The third monk identifies their conflict as a perceptual one – both arguing monks fail to see the larger picture.
Of course, all these interpretations only hint at how to wrestle with these kōans. Neither the wisdom from practicing monks before us nor the supposedly wise characters in these stories can resolve them for you. That’s because the purpose of these kōans isn’t reaching a simple solution. It’s the very act of struggling with these paradoxical puzzles that challenges our desire for resolution and our understanding of understanding itself.
Zen – A school of Mahayana Buddhism that emphasizes meditation and intuition rather than ritual worship or study of scriptures. – Zen practices often focus on achieving a state of mindfulness and inner peace through meditation.
Kōans – Paradoxical anecdotes or riddles used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment. – The Zen master presented a kōan to his students, challenging them to find meaning beyond the confines of rational thought.
Mystery – A religious truth that is incomprehensible to reason and knowable only through divine revelation. – The concept of the Holy Trinity remains a profound mystery in Christian theology, inviting believers to explore its depths through faith.
Enlightenment – A state of spiritual awakening and insight in which an individual transcends desire and suffering to achieve a profound understanding of the universe. – The Buddha’s enlightenment under the Bodhi tree is a central narrative in Buddhist teachings, symbolizing the path to spiritual liberation.
Ambiguity – The quality of being open to more than one interpretation, often leading to uncertainty or inexactness in meaning. – Philosophers often explore the ambiguity of language to understand how it shapes human perception and thought.
Paradox – A seemingly self-contradictory statement or proposition that, when investigated, may prove to be well-founded or true. – The paradox of the Ship of Theseus raises questions about identity and change, challenging our understanding of what it means for something to remain the same over time.
Attachment – In Buddhist philosophy, the emotional clinging to people, objects, or ideas that leads to suffering and hinders spiritual growth. – Practicing non-attachment is considered essential in Buddhism to overcome suffering and achieve inner peace.
Perception – The process by which individuals interpret sensory information to represent and understand their environment. – In philosophy, perception is often examined to understand how it influences our knowledge and experience of reality.
Wisdom – The ability to think and act using knowledge, experience, understanding, and insight, often associated with a deep understanding of life. – Socratic philosophy emphasizes the pursuit of wisdom through questioning and dialogue as a means to achieve a virtuous life.
Understanding – The ability to comprehend and grasp the meaning, significance, or nature of something. – In religious studies, understanding the historical and cultural context of sacred texts is crucial for interpreting their teachings accurately.
