Tao-ing Zen

Zen Buddhism should be treated more like Taoism which goes off in two quite different directions: philosophical and religious.  Philosophical Taoism (300 B.C.) we know by The Book of Lao-tzu (the all too familiar Tao Te Ching) and the second book, The Book of Chuang-tzu.  The Taoist religion, which emerged much later than philosophical Taoism (between 150 and 1200 C.E.), is comprised of six major sects. 

Those familiar with the religious institution of Japanese Zen are aware of the importance and dominance of rituals which even include zazen or seated meditation.  Yet, the traditional spirit of Zen is iconoclastic and like philosophical Taoism insofar as it is introspective.  It doesn't work well in an institutional setting.  Real Zen, I dare say, is not found in an official training monastery with Zen monks sitting mindlessly.

Zen becomes a problem when it turns into an institutional religion which means that it is a sectarian phenomenon.  But why should Zen be such?  It is not sectarian if we see in its beginnings that it wants us to realize Buddha Mind (fo-hsin).  Zen understood, early on, that the awakened Mind is continually being transmitted to all sentient beings if only they made the effort to clear away the worldly dust from their eyes and receive it.  This has nothing to do with being an official member of a Zen sect.

The probability of awakening to Mind (bodhicitta), I would argue, is greatest where institutional religion has not set foot; where, in addition, Buddhist texts and Zen texts are venerated and treated, not as ends in themselves, but as so many fingers pointing to the moon of awakening.  If we can call such Zen ‘philosophical Zen’, borrowing from Taoism, this might be a good start for Zen’s rehabilitation.  Some of the Zen that as emerged in the West I would characterize as philosophical Zen as opposed to religious Zen which tries to project institutional authority.

 

Comments

[Bone Marrow Zen]

"

'Empty theories' is what we call it when bystanders play around with terminology. Playing around like that is good for nothing. Dive in with body and soul!

You’ve got to die completely in order to be able to reflect on the buddha-dharma. It isn’t enough to torture yourself and only die halfway.

The buddha-dharma is nothing for spectators. It's about you.

Religion doesn't mean changing the world around myself. It means changing my eyes, my ears, my way of seeing and my head.

The buddha-dharma isn't a subject to be studied. The real question is: “What am I doing with my body?” The human body is set-up very practically. But what do we use this practical body for anyway? Usually, we use it as a slave to our illusions. The buddha-dharma means using the body in a way that doesn’t make it a slave of our illusions. That means putting body and mind in order.

The buddha-dharma isn't an idea. It's about the problem, 'How do I deal with myself?'

"

(Quote from 'To You' by Sawaki Kodo Roshi. Kodo Sawaki (沢木 興道 1880-1965) is considered by some to be the most important Japanese Zen master of the 20th century.)

[Jure]

In a concrete communal setting, you need to set some schedule for the residents. This has not much to do with Zen, but with the logic of a community. If many people practise together, you need some kind of structure. You can't have a community if everyone runs their own show.