A Verbal Transmission of the Non-Verbal Truth of Zen

^[1]

Legend has it that the Buddha simply raised a flower when he was asked the question, “What is truth?” The entire assemblage of his followers that gathered to listen to him was completely puzzled at his response. Only one of the Buddha’s disciples understood the meaning of his silence and broke into a smile. The truth was somehow conveyed to him without a word. This incident supposedly became the origin of the traditions of Zen, the teaching of the wordless transmission of truth.

1. Zen as an Introduction to Buddhism

It is exciting, but undoubtedly challenging, to try to deliver the meaning of this ‘silent’ teaching in a U.S. college classroom where we are expected to talk. Some Buddhists of Zen lineages would even argue that it is not a coherent idea to verbally explain the teachings of Zen when Zen traditions explicitly deny the usefulness of any conceptual approach to truth. But I wanted to find a way for this allegedly impossible project. After all, the Buddha used ‘skillful means (upaya 方便)’ of a great variety wherever and whenever he thought they could benefit different groups of audiences. The incoherent idea of a verbal teaching of the silent truth of Zen may not be deemed incoherent at all if it could best help enlighten or awaken my Western students who have virtually no knowledge of Buddhism.

Two and a half decades ago, I gladly took up this challenge in the way only our reckless youths would prefer. I chose a story of Zen for the topic of my sample class when I was interviewed for a professorship to teach analytic metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and contemporary epistemology. I could not expect many students or professors in the audience to be familiar with Buddhism, especially when they were going to observe and evaluate the teaching performance of a candidate whose job descriptions included nothing but hardcore analytic philosophy courses. My challenge was to use verbally skillful means to teach my Western audience the wordless truth of Zen and help them become enlightened in 50 minutes.

It seems that my verbal teaching of non-verbal truth was effective in some way. I got a job offer with the recommendation of the professors in the audience (but of course I am not sure if I was offered the job because my skillful means helped the professors achieve enlightenment). I took it, and I am still teaching at the same college. The sample class I taught surely gave me a very interesting, exciting, and encouraging experience. I have naturally come to wish to share this experience with other philosophers who teach, or plan to teach, Zen in their college classes. This natural wish motivated me to complete this essay and leave a record of my extraordinary experience.

Let me ask you not to be surprised about how I taught the sample class. The topic I gave at the beginning of the class would be rather unusual to the Western audience, although it was only one of many dramatic episodes so often cited and enjoyed by Buddhists in the history of Zen. I taught the class as follows.

Once upon a time in ancient Korea, there was a renowned Zen monk. One day his student asked a question, and the monk gave a surprising response:

“Master, what is the Buddha?”

“Dogshit!”

This dialogue is quite puzzling on its surface. Does the master’s answer mean that the Buddha is a piece of dogshit? The master and his student were both Buddhist monks, and it is hard to imagine that the famous monk was somehow teaching a kind of blasphemy to his student. But the master’s answer seems to ‘literally’ imply that the Buddha was a piece of dogshit. What is going on here?

Zen traditions are full of puzzling but interesting stories of this curious nature. Buddhists have learned the teachings of Zen with a lot of jokes, fun, and laughter. But let me tell you. There is absolutely no blasphemy involved anywhere in these stories. When someone points to the moon with a finger, you are not expected to see the finger itself. You should instead look at the moon which the finger points to. Likewise, it would not be wise to try to understand the meaning of these Zen stories by merely analyzing the syntax and semantics of the sentences used in the stories. For instance, the master’s answer could never be correctly understood by analyzing the meaning of the word “dogshit.” We need to see what our dialogue points to, not the dialogue itself. The purpose of this chapter is to help my Western audience understand the point of this puzzling dialogue that does not seem to make any sense.

2. Basic Teachings of Buddhism

To grasp the gist of the Zen teaching, a brief introduction to Buddhism is in order. Before addressing the philosophical teachings of Buddhism, I ask students if they know anything about Buddhism ─ I mean, anything. There is not much response ─ they talk about Dalai Lama, the fat happy Buddha (but he is in fact not a Buddha!), meditation, etc. I go ask again if anyone knows the meaning of the word “the Buddha.” This time, there is no answer, just silence. Then I give the answer myself. “The Buddha” means ‘The Enlightened One.’ This is the etymologically correct answer, and the students nod their heads. But it is not a philosophically good one because it begs the question. We need to ask further what it is that the Buddha was enlightened of.

Noble Fourfold Truth and Noble Eightfold Path

What was it that the Buddha was enlightened of or awakened to? ─ It was the truth about life and the world. The Buddha gave people a variety of teachings for 45 (49?) years after his enlightenment. It would be reasonable to believe that the content of his earliest teachings might have been what the Buddha was awakened to in his enlightenment:

(1) This world and our life in it are fundamentally flawed and unsatisfactory. We suffer.

(2) The conditions that gather and form our excessive attachment (craving) are the cause of this unhappiness.

(3) But we can avoid this unsatisfactoriness by eliminating its cause, that is, the conditions responsible for our craving.

(4) There is a way to eliminate unsatisfactoriness.

This is the famous Noble Fourfold Truth that the Buddha was enlightened of. It is the most basic teaching of all schools of Buddhism, and thus it deserves more of our attention although it is not directly related to the characteristic teachings of Zen.

The first teaching of the Noble Fourfold Truth is that our life in this world is fundamentally flawed and unsatisfactory. Important stages of our life are marked with painful experiences. Birth is no doubt a physically traumatic experience for both mother and baby. Youth is short, and we soon grow old. Aging comes with weakness, and we fall ill sooner or later. We eventually die. No one can avoid any of these unsatisfactory phases of life. The Buddha discusses other unsatisfactory aspects of our life and the world. We cannot always live with those whom we love most. Our loved ones often have to live far away from us, and they leave us behind for good when they die. This is very unsatisfactory. Its flip side is that we have to live with those whom we dislike. People can have bad experiences with their roommates, colleagues, relatives, etc. One can easily understand what this aspect of life must be like. Just try to imagine how the Jews must have felt when they had to live with Hitler and his followers in Nazi Germany. I suppose you would not need any more examples.

The point of this first teaching is not to espouse a pessimistic view of the world and life. To the contrary, it invites us to courageously admit the unsatisfactory aspects of the world and life so that we can find a way to solve the problems. The Buddha did not end teaching when he recognized the unsatisfactoriness of our life. He proceeded further to analyze the cause of this unhappiness and concluded that the conditions forming our craving (excessive desires and attachments) cause our suffering. This is the second teaching of his Noble Fourfold Truth.

What does it mean to say that attachment is the causal origin of our unhappiness? Perhaps the following formula, however crude it may be, can serve as a principle of happiness and help explain the nature of the problem of attachment:

Happiness = satisfaction / desire (attachment)

Happiness increases when desires are satisfied more. Given the same amount of desire, the increase of satisfaction results in the increase of happiness. If it is for some reason impossible to increase satisfaction, one may try not to increase desires; or if the satisfaction has to decrease, one may like to decrease desires and remain as happy as before. The Buddha teaches that it is always a good idea to try to decrease any unnecessary or excessive desires for one’s happiness because, given limited supplies of material goods and services available, it is hard to increase the satisfaction of our ever-growing desires. Further, there are some desires that one can never satisfy – for instance, desires to avoid aging, illness, and eventual death. These very human, natural, and fundamentally unsatisfiable desires bring about what we may call ‘existential’ sufferings. For peace of mind, we need to learn not to have these desires.

Suppose that one could reduce his or her desires much, so much as to have the amount of desires approach zero. According to our formula, then, happiness will approach infinity. No wonder the Buddha, who has completely eliminated all attachments, always smiles with blissful joy. The third teaching of the Noble Fourfold Truth is that we can avoid the unsatisfactoriness of our life by eliminating its cause, that is, by eliminating the conditions of our craving. The fourth truth teaches that there are eight right ways to eliminate craving most effectively: Follow the Noble Eightfold Path – Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. The gist of this teaching is that one should have the right kind of wisdom, cultivate the right sort of moral virtues, and always practice the right type of meditation. Wisdom, morality, and meditation will help eliminate craving most efficiently.

Historically, the Buddha’s teaching has been called the teaching of the Middle Way. It encourages us to avoid extremes and choose the middle way for our knowledge, judgments, and actions. The Buddha’s view has been compared to Aristotle’s golden mean^[2] when it is applied to the issues of moral virtues. The Noble Fourfold Truth is regarded as the Buddha’s first teaching that clearly demonstrates the spirit of his Middle Way. From the way it has been explained in the traditions, however, it is not clear how the Noble Fourfold Truth could be understood as the teaching of the Middle Way. It has often been explained that following the Noble Eightfold Path causes us to remain in the Middle Way, somewhere in between the two extremes. But, again, it is not clear how we can tread the middle way by following the right kinds of wisdom, morality, and meditations.

The reason for this lack of clarity might be, I believe, that there in fact is no causal relation here. The teaching of the Noble Eightfold Path lists eight right kinds of things to do. We may well interpret that these eight right kinds of things are themselves eight examples of the Middle Way. In other words, following the Noble Eightfold Path is following the Middle Way in this interpretation. It is not the case that the former causes the latter to happen; the former is identical with the latter. For instance, Right Speech is one of the eight right paths and it teaches us to use language that should not be mean or cruel but at the same time is not flattering or overly pleasing ─ in other words, it teaches us to remain in the middle way between the two extremes when we use our language. Therefore, following the teaching of Right Speech is ─ ‘is’ in the sense of ‘is identical with’ ─ following the teaching of the Middle Way. There is no causal relation here.

Right Speech is itself one example of the Middle Way. Perhaps we could also call Right Speech ‘Speech in the Middle Way.’ We can say the same for the other seven right kinds of things to do. All this explains the reason that the Noble Fourfold Truth, of which the important part is the Noble Eightfold Path, is a teaching of the Middle Way.

Impermanence

All Buddhist schools in history have accepted the Noble Fourfold Truth. It was the content of the Buddha’s very first sermon given to people after he became the Buddha, that is, after his enlightenment. Other teachings of the Buddha, which are more closely related to the philosophical foundations of Zen traditions, include his teachings of impermanence (annica 無常) and dependent arising (pratītyasamutpāda 緣起). The teaching of impermanence may well be compared to Heraclitus’ view of the world.^[3] Everything changes constantly, and nothing remains the same over time. Heraclitus’ famous example illustrates this point clearly: Can we step in the same river twice? No, the river is made of water and the water flows constantly; we cannot step in the same water twice, so it is impossible to step in the same river twice. Although we keep using the same name, say, the Mississippi, to refer to a river, there exists no immutable river that remains the same over any duration of time.

No material objects stay the same because their constituent particles are constantly moving around, going away, and new particles entering all the time. Our mind also never stays the same. Different beliefs and thoughts are always coming in and being forgotten in our mind. The Buddha taught, and Buddhists believe, that there is in this world not a thing that lasts without change over any time duration. It would be only a result of ignorance to be attached to anything as if that thing would last permanently for us. The primary point of the Buddha’s teaching of impermanence is to show us how futile any attachment is.

Some philosophers would waste no time and object that the point of impermanence may be understood merely as a kind of philosophical doctrine of Buddhism, but not as truth tout court. These philosophers could easily point out that there already are good objections and counterexamples to impermanence.

If the teaching of impermanence is an absolute truth, should we not regard the truth of impermanence itself too as impermanent, thereby nullifying its importance?

Most Buddhists would accept the point of impermanence as an absolute and permanent truth, but this of course results in a paradox.

If the teaching is a permanent truth, it is impermanent; if the teaching too is impermanent, it is a permanent truth.

This well-known paradox presents us with a logical problem.

There are other kinds of objections based on powerful counterexamples. Contemporary metaphysicians’ stock examples of necessary truth, such as ‘The sum of internal angles of a triangle is 180 degrees,’ ‘Water is H2O,’ and ‘Gold is the element with atomic number 79’ may make good candidates of counterexamples. For many philosophers, these truths do not seem to be impermanent; they never change. We would wonder how Buddhists believing in impermanence would explain these cases away.

What is philosophically more troubling is that we can take the teaching of impermanence only as one of many possible ways to view the world and life. Let me explain this point with an example. The material constituents of the city of Boston have constantly changed ever since it was named Boston several hundred years ago. As we ordinarily believe in our everyday life, however, the proper name “Boston” has always designated the same city. One may think that this is evidence which is good enough to make us believe that there is something permanent about Boston that has lasted with no change for hundreds of years.

Another good example is our personal identity. It is a well-known scientific fact that all the molecules of a human body are completely replaced by other molecules every seven years or so. But Dave here is still the same Dave after seven years, and Sarah is always the same Sarah. Dave and Sarah may come to have very different beliefs and feelings every several years or so, but they will still be the same Dave and Sarah. Buddhists would vehemently object to this commonsensical belief, but we cannot deny that at least this is how we ordinarily think about people’s identities. This is a very strong intuition about our personal identity, and our belief system about persons crucially hinges on it. Buddhists have had uphill fights to prove that this commonsense is wrong and that it mostly leads us to suffering.

I must admit I do not really believe that the Buddhist view of impermanence could easily change much of our traditional belief system that is based on commonsense and ‘natural’ intuitions. Other competing views might seem more appealing to us when we try to understand the world and life. Buddhists can try to show that other views have serious philosophical problems, and that they are not conducive to obtaining enlightenment and nirvana. But it would not be an easy task to persuade everyone to believe that enlightenment and nirvana are ultimately great things to strive for. So, for now, it should suffice for the purpose of our discussion if we just remember that Buddhists choose impermanence for their worldview.

Dependent Arising and Emptiness^[4]

More fascinating and more closely related to the philosophical foundations of Zen traditions is the teaching of dependent arising. It teaches that everything comes into existence, abides, and passes out of existence depending on conditions. Buddhists in South Asia have claimed that this teaching was originally meant to point only to causal relations. Everything has its place in the causal network of the world, and nothing can escape this network. There is not a thing or an event that does not have a cause, and this thing/event will itself become a cause of another thing/event. Construed this way, the teaching of causal relation apparently does not have anything particularly surprising or fascinating.

However, the point of dependent arising has been expanded quite extensively and has received thoroughly metaphysical interpretations among the Buddhist schools in Central and East Asia: Everything arises depending on everything. This new interpretation of dependent arising certainly includes non-causal connections as well as causal relations. Let me explain the nature of this new interpretation with the following example.

It is now lunch time in Minnesota, U.S.A. It is then 2 am in Beijing, China. Would you, staying in Minnesota, be willing to believe that there is at least one Chinese man who is at the moment eating steamed dumplings on the other side of the world? It is pretty late at night in China, but considering the size of their population, you would believe that there must be at least one hungry Chinese man who is eating steamed dumplings rather quickly. You are related to this man in such a way that you have the ‘relational property’ of having this Chinese man eating steamed dumplings at this moment.

Suppose this man suddenly chokes on the dumplings and meets an untimely death. Then, I come to lose one of my properties ─ the property of having this Chinese man on the other side of the world. I am totally unaware of the existence of this man, but I am still related to this person in the way I just described. If we include this kind of relation in the relations we have with other things in the world, although they are obviously not causal relations, it seems clear that everything arises dependently on everything. Even if there is a small, negligible change on a distant planet in a remote galaxy, say, if a small rock rolls down a slope on that planet, this change surely affects me and brings about a change in me on Earth. Considering this most comprehensive sense of relations, we may well easily understand the following line of a famous poem in Zen traditions: “A drop of morning dew on the tip of a grass blade contains the whole universe” ─ of course it does because everything penetrates into everything in the universe!^[5]

But I think the Buddhist claim of dependent arising also faces philosophical objections. Buddhism does not recognize the existence of self (or soul).^[6] The view of free agent and the view of action caused by free will would be difficult to explain in Buddhism if dependent arising were to be understood simply as causal relation. It would be hard to accept, for instance, if our will to become enlightened should be deemed to be determined by causal relations, not by our free choices. On the other hand, some philosophers will also find it objectionable if dependent arising should include non-causal relations as well because they believe those non-causal relations are too abstract to be real relations that can make any real changes in the world. As with any other philosophical view, the Buddha’s claim of dependent arising faces a good number of objections. Buddhists may well say, though, that it would be most conducive to achieving enlightenment and nirvana if we view the world and life in light of dependent arising. Again, it is good enough for our purposes of discussion if we just note that the Buddhists in Zen traditions choose to include all those metaphysical relations including non-causal connections in their view of dependent arising.

The Buddha’s point of dependent arising leads to the famous Mahayanist thesis of emptiness (void 空). Everything changes constantly, and nothing arises independently. When everything arises depending on conditions, nothing can exist on its own. Since nothing can exist independently, nothing can have its own intrinsic nature ─ how can anything have its own intrinsic nature if it cannot even exist on its own? Everything is empty of independent existence and essence. This is the meaning of the word “emptiness” in Buddhism.

Emptiness is in fact just the mode of existence of the same things that we have known all along. Emptiness does not mean nothingness. The table in front of you, for instance, is not really something in the sense that it exists independently of other things and conditions. That is, it does not have its own intrinsic nature due to the lack (or emptiness) of independent existence. So, the table is not really something. However, it is not nothing either because it does come into existence, abides, and passes out of existence depending on conditions. The table does exist as such. In other words, it is not really something, but it is not nothing either. It exists, well, mysteriously, somewhere between absolute existence and nonexistence. This mode of existence was named emptiness.

3. Zen and Emptiness Misunderstood

Later on, however, since emptiness is the very mode of existence of everything, the name emptiness came to be used to refer to the reality or true nature of all things. This new practice created a false and misleading impression that Buddhism recognizes the existence of true nature of things after all. In other words, some Buddhists began to reify emptiness. Emptiness came to be understood as something real. It was regarded as the true nature of existence or as an entity in itself. However, we need to remember that everything that exists arises only dependently on conditions, and that emptiness was originally just the name of this mode of existence. The reification of emptiness as a real entity came to present a source of serious philosophical confusion. Let me give an example.

Suppose your tabletop is rectangular. Is your tabletop identical with rectangularity? No, it is not. Its shape is rectangular, but this does not mean that the tabletop is itself rectangularity. The given entity and its mode of existence should not be identified. The earth is round, but it is not identical with its sphericity; a ripe tomato is red, but it is not identical with its redness; a knife is sharp, but it is not identical with its sharpness, and so on. However, there have been in the history of Buddhism a good number of schools that developed their views based on this misunderstanding. These Buddhist schools see emptiness in everything that exists in the universe. They believe that this emptiness reveals the very nature of existence; to grasp the nature of reality is the gist of the Buddha’s enlightenment; the Buddha became the Buddha because he realized the truth of emptiness; so, emptiness is the very essence of the Buddha. In other words, the Buddha is nothing other than emptiness itself!

It is an outright logical contradiction to claim that the essence of the Buddha is emptiness when the Buddha’s dependent arising, of which the concept leads to that of emptiness, denies the existence of any intrinsic nature of anything ─ including the Buddha himself. But it is also a historical fact that there have been many Buddhist schools that have accepted these misleading inferences with little critical analysis. These schools claimed that everything in the world is emptiness, which is the very essence of the Buddha, and thus everything is already a Buddha or at least has Buddha-Nature (佛性). These Buddhist schools saw a Buddha in everything they saw. So, for them, even a piece of dogshit contained Buddha-Nature which is as good as the Buddha! Well, this is one possible way to interpret the puzzling dialogue I introduced at the beginning of this essay: “Master, what is the Buddha?” ─ “You can see a Buddha present even in such a low, insentient being as a piece of dogshit!”

There have been Buddhist schools whose views are very much consistent with this rather embarrassing interpretation. Some Buddhists actually took this kind of interpretation quite seriously. But it is hard for me to swallow this interpretation because (1) it is consistent only with the views based on the fallacious inferences I described above, (2) it erroneously presupposes that the Buddha has an intrinsic nature of which the existence his teaching of dependent arising (emptiness) denies, and (3) there is a different, preferable interpretation.

In Zen traditions as well, many Buddhists believe that they can and should see emptiness in everything at every moment. Dependent arising was about the mode of all existence, and its concept led to that of emptiness. Emptiness was, however, frequently reified by careless logical inferences and regarded as the true nature of existence. For many Zen Buddhists too, everything, including the Buddha, is emptiness. So, for them, the understanding of the nature of emptiness is the key to understanding the nature of enlightened beings like the Buddha and Bodhisattvas. But you do not have to meet and listen to the Buddha or Bodhisattvas to grasp and comprehend the nature of emptiness because emptiness is everywhere all the time. You can use anything at any moment as an instrument that facilitates the process of your enlightenment. You can enjoy the bliss of nirvana while simply breathing in and breathing out as long as you realize that the breathing is itself emptiness. Eating a good breakfast is to actualize Buddha-Nature. A cup of tea is full of Buddhas once you realize it. You can be struck by the utmost beauty of the full moon and get immediately enlightened. Sitting meditation effectively facilitates your achievement of enlightenment and nirvana.

All these teachings may well be summarized in the following famous sentence of Nāgārjuna often cited in Zen traditions: Samsara (transmigration) is nirvana.^[7] What this sentence means is that life in this secular world of transmigration is nirvana ─ the state of being completely free of all suffering. Nirvana is brought about by enlightenment based on the realization of the truth of emptiness. Emptiness is right here right now in our everyday life; so, in Zen traditions, ultimate enlightenment and nirvana are also right here and right now, everywhere and all-embracing ─ if only we realize it.

What is culturally fascinating about this view of omnipresent emptiness in Zen traditions is that, combined with the teachings of Daoism and its ‘nature-ism,’ it greatly helped espouse the love of nature among East Asians. How can anyone not love nature and cherish its beauty when every corner of it is full of Buddhas? There are only a handful of Asians living in New England, but if you go see the beautiful autumn foliage of the White Mountains in New Hampshire you will come to realize that virtually half of all the tourists are East Asians. These Asians cannot miss the opportunity to appreciate the beauty of nature. There would have been fewer environmental issues if Zen traditions had taken root in other parts of the world as well.

Despite the positive facts mentioned above, the reification of emptiness is a metaphysical mistake. Seeing Buddha Nature as an intrinsic nature of a person or other entity is also a philosophical error. All this goes against the point of dependent arising and emptiness. However, as long as Buddhists maintain their keen awareness on the nature of emptiness only as the mode of existence, finding emptiness in every aspect of our ordinary life and at every corner of nature is quite harmless in their journeys to enlightenment. Since the realization of the truth of emptiness is the key to achieving enlightenment, seeing emptiness everywhere and constantly reminding themselves of this truth could effectively help Buddhists obtain their enlightenment and achieve nirvana. Remember that emptiness is everywhere all the time ─ but only as the mode of existence, not as a real entity that exists on its own.

4. Zen Riddles and Dependent Arising

We need to be careful here. Most schools in Zen traditions would not go so far as to claim that even such an entity as a piece of dogshit is a Buddha just because the mode of its existence also reveals the truth of emptiness. It is only sentient and intelligent beings that can be enlightened and become Buddhas; all the other insentient things may be used as instruments that can facilitate or trigger the process of enlightenment, but they are not themselves Buddhas. I think this is the right view that Buddhists should accept. In order to make better sense of the dialogue I introduced earlier, we need to find a more persuasive interpretation.

Zen traditions have created many interesting but apparently puzzling stories for instructional purposes. Let me give you another example. A Zen master asked a group of students, “There is a reflection of the moon on the surface of the water. Is that water or the moon?” There was silence for a while. Finally, a student came forward and answered, “Last night I saw the North Star in the southern sky.” The master responded, “Excellent!” We all know that it is impossible to see the North Star in the southern sky. Then why did the Master like the answer? This is very puzzling, and the master’s question was designed to provoke intensive research on the part of the students. Let me call these puzzling questions Zen riddles. Students are expected to struggle much, sometimes for years, to solve these riddles ─ until they come to realize that there is no solution!

Zen traditions have emphasized the importance of sitting meditation where you try to have all your thoughts fall off from the edge of your mind. It is relatively easier to concentrate on a particular thought that you have in your mind than to have no thought at all. Just try not to think about anything even for one moment. You will find it very difficult to completely empty your mind. But, of course, you need to practice this meditation to grasp and experience the truth, which is nothing other than emptiness of everything. The majority of Zen traditions have been influenced by the Huayan (華嚴) view of dependent arising. They interpret it in such a way that everything penetrates into and arises dependently on everything. Since everything is necessarily interconnected to everything, any attempt to differentiate a thing (or a group of things) from every other thing inevitably goes against the Buddha’s teaching of dependent arising. Attempts of differentiation cloud our vision from the true mode of existence and thus hinder us from grasping and experiencing the truth ─ the truth of dependent arising and emptiness.

Now we are going to see why Zen traditions focus so much on the value of silence. Language uses concepts, and conceptualization is always differentiation. Differentiation blocks us from seeing the true mode of existence because it attempts to sever the relation of the interconnected things of the world. Suppose you entertain the concept of human in your mind. Is there anything that you are differentiating from humans with your concept of human? ─ Yes, you are differentiating from humans everything that is not human. Using any concept in your thought necessarily results in your dividing the whole world that cannot be divided, which makes you unable to see the truth of dependent arising and thus makes your enlightenment impossible. No wonder silence is so valued in Zen traditions; not just silence of not talking but also a complete pause of your conceptualizing thoughts in your mind.

The truth cannot be verbally expressed because any use of language/concept involves differentiation, and differentiation goes against the Buddha’s teaching of dependent arising which is the very mode of existence. Now we can understand why the Buddha simply raised a flower when he was asked a question, “What is truth?” Any verbal answer would have inevitably distorted the truth that cannot be verbally expressed. The Buddha could have also kept silent smiling gently, or he could have said “Have a cup of tea,” “Birds are singing beautifully,” etc., all of which are completely unrelated to the given question. These are the only kind of possible responses that are not incorrect. The Zen riddle we discussed earlier may also be understood in the same vein. “There is a reflection of the moon on the surface of the water. Is that water or the moon?” ─ This question itself is nonsensical. The only good answer to nonsense is more nonsense. So, the student answered, “Last night I saw the North Star in the southern sky.” The master of course responded positively.

Shall we now turn to the very first puzzling dialogue I introduced at the beginning of this chapter? In Zen traditions, “What is the Buddha?” is itself a misleading question. In Buddhism, the Buddha is often another name for truth, but the question requires a verbal answer of what truth is when the truth cannot be verbally described. The master’s answer “Dogshit!” actually means ‘Nonsense!’ (Westerners would have used “Bullshit!” to mean nonsense, but Koreans were not much familiar with the shit of bulls because they were not cattle-raising people, while they had dogs in their neighborhood.  Koreans would say “The guy is dog-barking” when Westerners want to say “The guy is bullshitting”.) Zen traditions are full of jokes and humor. Foul language, shouting, and even beatings are sometimes allowed for instructional purposes. Wouldn’t it be exciting to have a lot of fun and get enlightened?

Zen traditions take the value of nonattachment quite seriously. For instance, although the Buddha’s teaching of dependent arising is of paramount importance, one should not be attached even to this teaching. So, although everything is empty of intrinsic nature, the teaching that everything is empty is itself also empty of intrinsic nature. But that that everything is empty is empty is also empty of intrinsic nature. That that that everything is empty is empty is empty is in its turn also empty of intrinsic nature… And, according to some Buddhist monks, this constant process of infinite negation is the very process of remaining enlightened! Another example of a Zen riddle may also show how seriously Zen traditions approach the teachings of emptiness and nonattachment: “In order to get enlightened, kill the Buddha and your Zen master!” Perhaps this is the most puzzling riddle one can ever encounter in Buddhism. But we now can make good sense of it. One should not be attached even to his/her master, the Buddha, or their teachings, especially when the teachings were given in the form of verbal expressions.

5. Disclaimer?

I have in this essay tried to convey the teachings of these traditions of the wordless transmission of truth. Those who have understood the teachings must now realize that everything I wrote in this essay is also empty of intrinsic nature. I attempted to verbally describe the truth that cannot be verbally expressed. Please do not be attached to anything you have read if you wish to be enlightened.

Review

What is Buddhism?

‘Buddhism’ literally means ‘the system of the Buddha’s teaching,’ and ‘the Buddha’ originally meant ‘The Enlightened One.’

The Buddha was Prince Siddhartha Gautama before renouncing the secular world. He left his family and palace and chose to become a renunciant practitioner to solve the problems of birth, aging, illness, and death. He realized the truth about oneself (our life) and the world. His enlightenment was possible because he understood the penetrating truth on life and the world.

The Buddha taught for 45 (or 49) years after his enlightenment. Many people became the Buddha’s students, and devotees of various countries were edified. The Buddha organized his monastic order and ran it with his rules for monks and nuns. Unlike the founders of other world religions, the Buddha accepted women as fully ordained members of his monastic order.

Buddhism does not recognize the existence of almighty gods like the Creator. Although there are gods in Buddhism, they can fall into a lower-level status of life if their good karma, which resulted from good deeds, is exhausted. Buddhism considers everything ever-changing. Gods are no exceptions. Nothing is eternal or immortal in Buddhism.

The Great Tripitaka, for instance, the Tripitaka Koreana, is the collection of the Buddhist teachings. It is composed of ‘three baskets’ (tripitaka): (1) sutra pitaka is the collection of the Buddha’s teaching, (2) vinaya pitaka has the monastic disciplines for monks and nuns, and (3) abhidharma pitaka is about the philosophical discussion of the Buddha’s teaching.

Christian or Muslim canon should not have even one letter added or removed since they are believed to be perfect. In contrast, the Great Tripitaka is not a complete or immutable system. The teachings of Buddhism have been variously interpreted as they have traveled across different cultures at different times, and new contents have been included in the Great Tripitaka. Accordingly, there have been changes in volumes and contents whenever the Great Tripitaka was compiled throughout history. The Great Tripitaka of the future will also have new, additional contents. The Great Tripitaka has an open canon system.

Attachment and Suffering 

We all live through several major life stages from birth to death. They are, as is commonly noted, birth, aging, illness, and death. We cannot, however, easily greet them with composure because they make life feel ephemeral and painful.

Childbirth is an extremely hard and painful process. However, there is a more important reason in Buddhism for which birth is not satisfactory. Once we are born, we must go through aging, illness, and, eventually, death. Who on earth wants to get old and sick, and die? It is birth that is the cause of all these sufferings. Hence Buddhism teaches that one should achieve enlightenment and attain nirvana to be liberated from the bondage of endless cycle of birth and death.

Everyone is fated to leave or to be left by the ones they love. No one is exempt from this pain. School friends’ paths do not usually cross after graduation. Some of them go far away and we never meet again. We may be able to live close to our parents and siblings, but they eventually die, and we can never see them again. This is in a way quite absurd, but we are all born with this fate.

In addition, we cannot free ourselves from living with the people we dislike. Family is home where we are born and grow up, but it does not mean that we always get along with all of them. Some suffer school violence, and others live in pain and agony as bullied by many. Also, we may become other people’s target of hostility just because we do not share their opinion. We have to live in conflict with such people within the same country and across the border. Can you even imagine how Jews must have felt when they had to live in Nazi Germany?

Everyone wants something. We want more and more day by day. But available goods and services are always limited. This is why we cannot get everything we want, and that’s why we suffer. There is a bigger problem. We cannot achieve happiness even when we get what we want. For satisfaction lasts only a while, and we want something more and better right after.

We will suffer and get exhausted even more if we long for everlasting youth and eternal life which are not possible at all to begin with. The determination to live with our loved ones for eternity and to get absolutely everything we want is also an ignorant obsession with something impossible, which only creates more suffering. It is also a flip side of the attachment to stay away, ignoring the necessity of teamwork, from some coworkers we dislike at work.

The more attachments we have, the less satisfaction we get, which increases our suffering. The Buddhist teaching of non-attachment relieves us of suffering.

Noble Fourfold Truth

The Noble Fourfold Truth is the content of the Buddha’s very first sermon that he gave after his enlightenment. The Buddha teaches people how to eliminate suffering as a doctor treats patients. Answering the following questions, you will realize that the way a doctor heals patients’ illness is similar to the way that we remove our suffering.

The answers are all ‘True.’

The traditional analogy above shows the structure of the Noble Fourfold Truth. The Noble Fourfold Truth teaches the truth of suffering, its origination, its cessation, and the path to follow to eliminate the origin of suffering. It is the content of the Buddha’s first teaching, so-called the First Turning of the Wheel of the Dharma.

In the previous sets of questions, we have examined and learned that our lives are laden with suffering. The Buddha teaches us that we should accept that our life is a sea of suffering. However, he does not try to teach nihilism or pessimism. On the contrary, he teaches us that if we want to fundamentally solve the problems of life, we must first acknowledge courageously that problems exist in our lives.

The various conditions that bring about suffering is the cause of suffering. The principal condition among them is attachment. We can eliminate suffering in life if we remove the attachment that causes suffering. We had better not be contented when the symptoms of suffering are alleviated for a while. We can become completely free from suffering only when the cause of suffering is eradicated.

The Buddha presents the Eightfold Path, which is the way of eliminating suffering. We will learn about the Eightfold Path in the next set of questions. Please note that the Noble Fourfold Truth is not four independent truths but one connected truth. It is like folding a piece of paper making four parts. These four parts are not different sheets of paper but make up one sheet of paper.

Noble Eightfold Path

The Buddha’s Noble Fourfold Truth teaches that we can free ourselves from suffering if we know the cause of suffering and remove it. We are going to learn here the Noble Eightfold Path, the specific way of eliminating suffering.

The Noble Eightfold Path contains three principles of attaining enlightenment —precepts, meditation, and wisdom. Buddhist practitioners are expected to follow these principles. Firstly, right speech, right action, and right livelihood are about the principle of precepts. Buddhist practitioners should learn and train through moral disciplines to avoid the evil and promote the good in word, deed, and thought. Secondly, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration are about the principle of meditation. Correct meditation maintains the equanimity of the mind. Thirdly, right view and right thought are about the principle of wisdom.

Each part of the Noble Eightfold Path is a specific case of the Buddha’s well-known teaching of the Middle Way. Right speech, for example, means that we should not use words extremely harshly or in exceedingly flattering ways. The correct speech is to follow the Middle Way. You should use the right words according to the time, place, and people with whom you converse. The right concentration teaches that we should not over-concentrate to the point of harming our health. Nor should we under-concentrate to the point of becoming lazy. We should choose the right middle between them. The same idea goes for the rest of the Noble Eightfold Path.

The Noble Eightfold Path, like the Noble Fourfold Truth, is not eight independent or separate paths but just eight parts of one connected path. It is like folding a piece of paper into eight parts ─ these eight parts are not different sheets of paper but make up different parts of one sheet of paper.

1 through 8 are eight parts of the Noble Eightfold Path. Nirvana and liberation are not parts of the Noble Eightfold Path itself, although they are the goals that Buddhists aim to achieve by following the Noble Eightfold Path.

Impermanence 

Can we step in the same river twice? A river flows constantly. The river we step into for the first time flows away, and its waters are replaced by other waters. By the time we step into the river a second time, the river is no longer the same. The river changes ceaselessly. We cannot step in the same river twice. Every corner of nature changes constantly.

All things we use in our daily life become worn out or broken in the end.  Otherwise, factories and shops would all go bankrupt. We may believe that things so solid or precious are not subject to change, but they also change and break. Even diamond chips or burns in high heat.

Also, the molecular structure of materials undergoes physical and chemical changes. DNA molecules that make up genes are no exception. They are replaced by new molecules, and their arrangements alter. Viruses, mutating constantly, continue to plague humanity. We desire our precious bodies to remain young, but we know this is just wishful thinking.

Astronomers have emphasized that not only the Earth but the entire Universe is constantly changing. And in the early 20th century Einstein had already shown that even time and space are not constant physical quantities.

There is no doubt that knowledge, emotion, and volition, which are traditionally regarded as constituting our mind, also change all the time. The size and content of our knowledge change day by day, and emotions are too capricious to hold still. There is no determination or will that remains the same permanently. We also know that no relationships, whether they are close or distant, stay unchanged.

As time goes on, one’s fanatical belief and support for a certain political ideology also change. The same goes for religious faith.