28. ZEN REMARKS

28. Often in Zen prose must make way for verse. Hence the following:

                    (i)  warm sun wet sand
                          the surging surf -
                          they sing their siren song



                   (ii)  on the lake at dawn
                          a rolling mist
                          and a voice calling
                         

ZEN REMARKS (27)

27. The literature of Zen is full of praise for samu, that is, work in the service of the sangha. And samu can take many forms. As for manual work, work that is mindless, repetitive, physically demanding and, very often, boring, the literature doesn't seem to have much to say. Here the worker is alone with the physical effort, bodily fatigue, and the endless whirl of thoughts. And yet there is a special dignity in this work in that it can engage the whole body while leaving the mind free to face the great matter of life, the question of one's True Self.
     Consider the story of Hsiang-yen (Kyogen), a Chan master who died towards the end of the T'ang Dynasty in China. Hsiang-yen was a man of remarkable intelligence and wide learning. Yet one day when his master Kuei-shan (Isan) asked for his view as to his own being before his parents were born, he found that he was unable to respond. Despairing of his intellectual activities and his knowledge of the scriptures, he burnt his notes and went off to serve as caretaker for the tomb of master Nan-yang (Nanyo) which had fallen into neglect. There he spent his days in simple manual work while focusing on the question of his being before his parents were born. And so it happened while sweeping up some fallen leaves that his broom sent a stone flying through the air. The stone hit some bamboo. Tock! At this Hsiang-yen was suddenly awakened to his True Self.

ZEN REMARKS (26)

26. Hogen of Seiryo was an eminent master active in the first half of 10th century China. As a young man he was steeped in the Mind Only school of Buddhist philosophy and was forever studying the Avatamsaka Sutras. Wandering from teacher to teacher he eventually came to Master Jizo. The master asked the travelling monk why he was wandering about like this. Faced with this question Hogen, in spite of all his philosophizing, found that he didn't know. So Jizo remarked, 'Not knowing is most intimate'. The young philosopher monk was intrigued by Jizo's statement but not enough to stay and study with him. Early next morning he prepared to resume his travels. Jizo accompanied him to the front gate of the temple near which was a huge boulder. No doubt aware of Hogen's enthusiasm for the Mind Only philosophy, Jizo pointed to the rock and enquired of Hogen whether it was inside or outside mind. Not surprisingly Hogen answered that it was inside mind. To which Jizo responded that Hogen must find this rock a heavy load to carry about in his mind. Taken aback, Hogen found that he could say nothing. Thereupon he became Jizo's disciple. Nevertheless, in subsequent interviews with his new master, Hogen persisted in quoting lines from the Avatamsaka Sutras. And invariably Jizo would tell him that Buddhism was not that sort of thing. Finally Hogen was reduced to admitting that he could have no thoughts, no reasoning. At which point Jizo told him that, from the Buddhist point of view, things directly presented themselves. Now of a sudden Hogen came to a deep Enlightenment-Realization.

ZEN REMARKS (25)

25. Meditating on koans is one of the major disciplines used in Zen. Mumon Ekai, a master active in 13th century China, spoke of using koans as brickbats to batter the gate that seems to bar entry to the way of Zen. This gate might be thought of as an impulse to say the unsayable, to speak what cannot, must not, be spoken. Mumon would liken the surrender to this impulse to 'striking at the moon with a stick', or 'scratching a shoe, whereas it is the foot that itches'. That is to say, in Zen there is a clear recognition of the incommensurability between the metaphysical impulse and what it seeks to express in the form of the propositions of philosophy or, as Mumon would put it, 'other people's words'. And so Mumon warns his disciples not to confuse their 'own treasures' - their own realisation of the metaphysical - with the 'things coming in through the gate', namely, the speculations of others. That is, he attempted, with the help of the cases of the ancient masters, that is, with koans, to awaken his monks to the fact that nothing, nothing at all, stood in the way of their full possession of the present moment of their daily lives. This nothing-gate-barrier was no more than a picture, a figment of the imagination, a product of conventional habits of thought. He might have pointed out to them that they were held captive by nothing but a picture. As Wittgenstein would say: 'A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably'.
     So might it not be the case that those who have difficulty in seeing that the practice of Zen is a philosophical practice are likewise held captive by a picture? And is this not a somewhat narrow and misleading picture of the nature and practice of philosophy, especially when viewed against the background of the whole history of Western philosophy? Here it would be well to recall the koan that asks: 'Why is it that a man of great strength cannot lift his legs?'

ZEN REMARKS (24)

24. The philosophical practice of Zen is about waking up to the way things are. As such, it is not concerned with teaching anything new. Rather, it is about showing what is already visible, hearing what is already audible, touching what is already tangible, tasting what is already tasty, and smelling what is already there to be smelt. Zen is about shaking the practitioner out of his or her slumber, whether that slumber be dogmatic, conceptual, linguistic or customary, so that things can be encountered just as they present themselves. If this sounds like a version of phenomenology, then perhaps it is, if phenomenology's primary concern is with what is immediately given in experience. Here, too, Wittgenstein comes to mind, given that throughout his philosophical career his attention was directed to his immediate experience. As he himself remarked, 'We want to understand something that is already in plain view'.
     Practices that are designed to awaken rather than to 'teach', are not about providing information or imparting doctrines. The Zen master puts the emphasis on training the disciple in a practical skill that is to be applied in everyday living, and not on the acquisition of a body of theoretical knowledge. In mastering the practical skills of Zen, the disciple awakens to the knowledge and understanding that underpin and accompany the practice of those skills.

ZEN REMARKS (23)

23. The practice of Zen as a philosophical practice is the exercise of a practical philosophy in the everyday life of the practitioner. This view of Zen as a practical philosophy should not be confused with other views of Zen philosophy that see it as the spelling out of a metaphysics that is said to be implicit in Zen practices and discourse, still less with the view that sees it as a body of Buddhist philosophical doctrines. For Zen, as understood here, represents a deliberate and rigorous turning away from the metaphysical speculations of the Mahayana. Attempts to explicate and articulate what is thought to be Zen's hidden philosophical potential only serve to betray Zen by returning it to metaphysics. Zen, if looked at through the lens of Wittgenstein's philosophy, does not have to deck itself out in the disputed doctrines of metaphysics in order to prove its philosophical credentials. Nevertheless, this does not mean that Zen is anti-metaphysical. Rather it is a case of refusing to engage in metaphysical speculations or to argue the merits of a metaphysical position. Instead, the Zen master lets the metaphysical manifest itself in whatever concrete individual act or thing is to hand. Careful attention to the koan and how it works will show that this is so. 'A monk asked Ummon, "What is Buddha?" Ummon replied, "A dried shit-stick!"'

ZEN REMARKS (22)

22. Wittgenstein once suggested the possibility of writing 'a serious philosophical work consisting solely of jokes'. If this was a serious suggestion then why not one consisting solely of koans? Might not such koan collections as the Mumonkan and the Hekiganroku be approached as serious philosophical works? An immediate objection would be that books of koans seldom, if ever, go in for argument or explanation. But neither would a philosophical book that consisted solely of jokes. Yet the appropriate response to both joke and koan serves as a demonstration of insight. The spontaneity of the appropriate response (laughter) to a joke is sufficient evidence that the required insight has occurred. A demand for explanation or argument demonstrates the opposite. In the language-game of the koan, as in the language-game of the joke, any demand for either explanation or argument shows not only that the point has been missed but that the rules of the game have not been learnt. Wittgenstein's suggestion that a serious philosophical work might consist solely of jokes indicates a view of philosophy that would admit the demonstration of insight by means other than argument or explanation. Might koan Zen be such a philosophy?