Ordinary implication as in the example of smoke implies fire is a relation between the definite ‘smoke’ and the indefinite unseen ‘fire’. In this regard, our everyday experiences have shown us that the probability of a fire being present where there is only smoke is almost certain. Carrying this one step further, implication works in the example of consciousness and its content. A definite thing for me implies my observing consciousness.
Where the implicate relationship breaks down is in spiritual awakening in the example of ‘these thoughts imply a substance or pure Mind’. While thought is definite in ‘this is a happy thought’ the substance of this thought is not only indefinite but its being is also problematic and unknown. Again, if we say that ‘this is a happy thought’ in which consciousness is believed to be the very substance of this thought, we do not actually know consciousness, itself, except as reflection of a particular content like a happy thought. Consciousness as substance would be necessarily supra-consciousness which not only transcends this limited reflection or the same, simple awareness of a content, but transcends the psychophysical body. But again, consciousness is not actually present for us or realized by us except as a speculative image or mark which functions somewhat as a symbol.
In normal implication in the example of ‘where there is smoke there is fire’ we have direct knowledge and the experience of both smoke and real caloric fire. In spiritual implication where it involves ‘the substance of thought is pure Mind’ ordinary people may have some direct knowledge of their thoughts—but certainly they have no knowledge of pure Mind although they might believe and insist otherwise. This leads to an irreducible problem or dualism for them inasmuch as they know thought but not its substance. The two elements of this dualism are definite thought and indefinite no-thought in which no-thought is unthinkable for them (and cannot even be created as a mental image).
This dualism is the real barrier of Zen expressed in the koan, Tou-lu's Three Barriers from the koan collection, Wu-men kuan/Wumenguan.
1) Brushing aside confusion to search out the hidden is only for the purpose of seeing essence. Right now where is your essence?
2) Only when you know your own essence can you be freed from birth and death. When you are dying, how will you be free?
3) When you are freed from birth and death, then you will know where you are going. When the elements disintegrate, where do you go? (trans. Thomas Cleary)
No matter how much the ordinary mind tries to explain away the dualism between thoughts of this koan in the form of its images, and the essence or substance of these thoughts, it fails. This koan cuts off access to spiritual implication—the divide, in fact, is too large to leap over for thought and thinking. Unlike with ordinary implication where ‘A implies B’, B or essence, remains unknowable. The ordinary mind has no direct acquaintance with B. This is ordinary mind’s discontent with Buddhism and Zen because there is no finality to ‘A implies X’ or the same ‘A implies not A’.
Thus its seems that the road of spiritual implication, in which the substance or essence of thought is actually known, runs in a different direction to thought, itself, and our general awareness of thought(s). In Buddhism, spiritual implication covers the development of the Bodhisattva leading eventually to Buddhahood as does the perfecting of wisdom (prajnaparamita). I need to add that spiritual implication commences with seeing the very substance of thoughts and not otherwise. Only then can we pass through Tou-lu's three barriers and eventually become Buddhas; perfecting spiritual implication in our all-too-human lives.
Comments