The Way of Zen - Alan Watts [77]
1 Ch’uan Teng Lu, 26.
2 I do not wish to press the analogy between the human mind and servo-mechanisms to the point of saying that the mind-body is “nothing but” an extremely complicated mechanical automaton. I only want to go so far as to show that feed-back involves some problems which are similar to the problems of self-consciousness and self-control in man. Otherwise, mechanism and organism seem to me to be different in principle–that is, in their actual functioning–since the one is made and the other grown. The fact that one can translate some organic processes into mechanical terms no more implies that organism is mechanism than the translation of commerce into arithmetical terms implies that commerce is arithmetic.
3 See the fascinating discussion of analogies between mechanical and logical contradictions and the psychoneuroses by Gregory Bateson in Reusch and Bateson, Communication: the Social Matrix of Psychiatry, esp. Chap. 8. (Norton; New York, 1950.)
4 In Suzuki (7), p. 80.
5 In Chu Ch’an (l), p. 29.
6 Bankei’s Daiho Shogen Kokushi Hogo. Japanese text edited by Furata and Suzuki. (Tokyo, 1943.) Translation read to the author by Professor Hasegawa.
7 In Chu Ch’an (1), p. 24.
8 Orategama, in Suzuki (1), vol. 1, p. 239.
9 Wu-teng Hui-yüan, 9.
10 Bankei Kokushi Seppo. Read to the author by Professor Hasegawa.
11 Cheng-tao Ke, 1.
12 Comment on Pi-yen Lu, 3.
13 Suzuki (7), pp. 73–87. Excerpts from this letter also appear in Suzuki (1), vol. 3, pp. 318–19.
14 Bankei Kokushi Seppo. Read to the author by Professor Hasegawa.
15 In Suzuki (10), p. 123.
16 Lin-chi Lu in Ku-tsun-hsü Yü-lu, 1. 4. 6, 11–12, 12.
17 Shih Niu T’u, 8.
18 In Ku-tsun-hsü Yü-lu, 1. 4. 13.
Three
ZA-ZEN AND THE KOAN
There is a saying in Zen that “original realization is marvelous practice” (Japanese, honsho myoshu a). The meaning is that no distinction is to be made between the realization of awakening (satori) and the cultivation of Zen in meditation and action. Whereas it might be supposed that the practice of Zen is a means to the end of awakening, this is not so. For the practice of Zen is not the true practice so long as it has an end in view, and when it has no end in view it is awakening–the aimless, self-sufficient life of the “eternal now.” To practice with an end in view is to have one eye on the practice and the other on the end, which is lack of concentration, lack of sincerity. To put it in another way: one does not practice Zen to become a Buddha; one practices it because one is a Buddha from the beginning–and this “original realization” is the starting point of the Zen life. Original realization is the “body” (t’i b) and the marvelous practice the “use” (yung c), and the two correspond respectively to prajna, wisdom, and karuna, the compassionate activity of the awakened Bodhisattva in the world of birth-and-death.
In the two preceding chapters we discussed the original realization. In this and the one that follows we turn to the practice or activity which flows from it–firstly, to the life of meditation and, secondly, to the life of everyday work and recreation.
We have seen that–whatever may have been the practice of the Tang masters–the modern Zen communities, both Soto and Rinzai, attach the highest importance to meditation or “sitting Zen” (za-zen). It may seem both strange and unreasonable that strong and intelligent men should simply sit still for hours on end. The Western mentality feels that such things are not only unnatural but a great waste of valuable time, however useful as a discipline for inculcating patience and fortitude. Although the West has its own contemplative tradition in the Catholic Church, the life of “sitting and looking” has lost its appeal, for no religion is valued which does not “improve the world,” and it is hard to see how the world can be improved by keeping still. Yet it should be obvious that action without wisdom, without clear awareness of the world as it really is, can never