15. Icy Water
(Updated 17 May 2021)
I have been upbeat about certain facets of Zen. There are of course negatives in Zen as there are in all human enterprises, and not least in those which neglect to honour the Creator. Let us review some of the misgivings. One accusation is that historically the relentless negation of logic and of rational differentiation, as reflected, for example, in the koans could (cf book by Lit-sen Chang quoted below) result in the mental collapse of the Zen seeker. Moreover, that "enlightenment" and nervous breakdown could be precariously synonymous. The logophobic shock tactics of Zen "Masters' (i e slapping and hitting the questioner, even to the point of breaking limbs) could be arbitrary, cynical, and bordering on the insane. There was also an iconoclastic bibliophobia. There can be an ethical vacuum (cf Alan Watts as discussed) within which certain virtues are simply asserted arbitrarily (cf again Sartre's existentialism). And fundamentally inimical to the Bible, as referred to above, there is the trait (Zen or Buddhist or both?) towards an absolute cosmic subjectivism and nihilism.
However, as far as any identification of Christianity with reductionist “logicism” is concerned, we have discovered that Dooyeweerd would seem to be more on the side of the “koan” than Van Til would seem to be. In ‘Jerusalem and Athens’ Dooyeweerd writes to Van Til (in a passage which has been pivotal in my own outlook):
“Supra-rational should by no means be confused with irrational. [bolding by FMF.] It is not, like the latter, the opposite, but the presupposition of the rational, just like the human self-hood is presupposed in every human thought and every human concept. God’s self-revelation in Holy Scripture as Creator and Redeemer concerns the central religious relation of man to his absolute Origin. Its true meaning is therefore to be understood by man only if his heart has been opened up to it through the moving power of the Holy Ghost, which is the dunamis of the biblical Word-revelation. What is said here about the dunamis of the Word-revelation and the central role of the heart in the understanding of its meaning is in complete accordance with the biblical testimony (cf. Is 6:10–13; Acts 16:14) and with the opinion of Calvin (cf the citations from the Institutes in New Critique Vol I, pp 516-7). But you place it “over against the simple thought-content of Scripture” and are of the opinion that it adds still further to the ambiguity of my transcendental critique. You think so, however, not on biblical ground, but in consequence of a rationalistic view of the Word-revelation and of the religious relation of man to God, which, you feel, is of a rational-ethical character. This rationalism implies also a relapse into a metaphysical theory of the intrinsical divine being and its attributes, which Calvin called a “vacua et meteorica speculatio.” That this theological metaphysics is necessarily involved in antinomies is, in your opinion, not a consequence of its vain attempt to exceed the boundaries of conceptual thought. It is only because of the necessary incompleteness of our theoretical knowledge about God and the created universe. The antinomies exist therefore only seemingly [in your view], but are nevertheless inevitable.” [Fuller context HERE]
The two main factors in this Dooyeweerd quote are that, firstly, there is far more to reality than simply the rational-irrational law of contradiction. The rational/logical aspect of reality is only one of 15 irreducible aspects (law-spheres/ modes of consciousness). For Dooyeweerd, full integral reality transcends even all of them in their coherence, since the only Source of cosmic meaning is the Living God as Creator and Sustainer. The second factor to carefully note follows on from this, ie that the “dunamis” (“dynamic”, “power”) of Bible-compliant enlightenment/ revelation transcends the conceptual not because it is “irrational” but because it is the Living Holy Spirit Himself.
And so, despite certain grave reservations, Zen at best seems (paradoxically?) to have an exceptional facility for engendering an enhanced sense of concrete reality, of the cosmic worth of the here and now (however "mundane" the moment), of the supremacy of simplicity, all of which seem holistic and healthy, Biblical indeed, and which has led to art (visual and verbal) of stunning refinement. This suggests some degree of "common grace" wisdom in the Zen tradition. For some chauvinist reason we find little difficulty in justifying analysis of atheistic Western philosophy. In fact Calvinist thinkers have persuaded us that it is our responsibilty to do so, and that it would be to our impoverishment and enfeeblement not to. I said “Calvinist thinkers”, but, in passing here, I should emphasise that I am now long on board with Herman Dooyeweerd’s strong preference, as his thinking developed, to shed the term “Calvinism” in favour of simply “Christian”. Dooyeweerd still continued to quote Calvin favourably of course. Here, regarding the issue of “common grace”, we could well take heed of Calvin when he tells us that we are supposed to seek out and benefit from such wisdom as the Holy Spirit has seen fit to bestow on misbelievers:
"Therefore, in reading profane authors, the admirable light of truth displayed in them should remind us, that the human mind, however much fallen and perverted from its original integrity, is still adorned and invested with admirable gifts from its Creator. If we reflect that the Spirit of God is the only fountain of truth, we will be careful, as we would avoid offering insult to him, not to reject or condemn truth wherever it appears. In despising the gifts, we insult the giver. How then can we deny that truth must have beamed on those ancient lawgivers who arranged civil order and discipline with so much equity? Shall we say that the philosophers, in their exquisite researches and skilful description of nature, were blind? Shall we deny the possession of intellect to those who drew up rules of discourse, and taught us to speak in accordance with reason? Shall we say that those who, by the cultivation of the medical art, expended their industry on our behalf were only raving? What shall we say of the mathematical sciences? Shall we deem them to be the dreams of madmen? Nay, we cannot read the writings of the ancients on these subjects without the highest admiration; an admiration which their excellence will not allow us to withhold. But shall we deem anything to be noble and praiseworthy, without tracing it to the hand of God? Far from us be such ingratitude; an ingratitude not chargeable even on heathen poets, who acknowledged that philosophy and laws, and all useful arts were the inventions of the gods. Therefore, since it is manifest that men whom the Scriptures term ‘carnal’ are so acute and clear-sighted in the investigation of inferior things, their example should teach us how many gifts the Lord has left in possession of human nature, notwithstanding its having been despoiled of the true good....
Nor is there any ground for asking what concourse the Spirit can have with the ungodly, who are altogether alienated from God. For what is said as to the Spirit dwelling in believers only, is to be understood of the Spirit of holiness, by which we are consecrated to God as temples. Notwithstanding this, he fills, moves and invigorates all things by virtue of the Spirit, and that according to the peculiar nature which each class of beings has received by the Law of Creation. But if the Lord has been pleased to assist us by the work and ministry of the ungodly in physics, dialectics, mathematics, and other similar sciences, let us avail ourselves of it, lest, by neglecting the gifts of God spontaneously offered to us, we be justly punished for our sloth (Institutes 2:2:15-16)
Having said all the above, and in marked contrast to any enthusiasm on my part, a bucket of decidedly icy water is poured on the notion of any positives in Zen by Lit-sen Chang in his relentlessly anti-Zen book called "Zen-Existentialism: The Spiritual Decline of the West", (Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1969) -
"...since the beginning of this (20th) century, Zen has had a profound impact on the West, especially among the intellectuals. Even God's own people are misled and intoxicated. They are fascinated with the spirit of Zen and think they have found the very key to unlock their problems. R.H. Blyth contends that "Zen is the most precious possession of Asia" and even feels that "it is today the strongest power in the world." (R.H. Blyth: Zen in English literature and Oriental Classics ) But, after all, what is Zen? The author, a former advocate of Zen, speaking from his own bitter experiences, believes it an utter fraud, only an avenue of pseudo-escape. It is not only religiously and logically unsound, but psychologically and socially detrimental. Zen is a "technique by which to achieve a mental breakdown." The so-called "satori" is simply "the final critical collapse under the accumulative pressures of stress." It is "a mental catastrophe," "a piling up of intellectual frustrations that lead to the crumbling of the edifice of logical thought." Although it is labeled as "the way of liberation," it is rather a cult of iconoclasm, a disastrous surrender to Nihilism, a kind of mystical "self-intoxication"; "a childish dependence upon magical omnipotence," a ridiculous substitution of "firecracker-propelled garbage cans for space rockets," (Griffis: Religion in Japan, Reischauer: Studies of Buddhism , Ernest Becker: Zen: A Rational Critic) a suicidal approach of "mind-murder" as induced by "doctrines of devils." (1Tim 4:1)
Well, we can't say we haven't been warned....
_______________________________________
