Samurai Calmness Of Mind
The Yogi breathing above mentioned is fit rather for physical...
All The Worlds In Ten Directions Are Buddha's Holy Land
We are to resume this problem in the following chapter. Suff...
Zen In The Dark Age
The latter half of the Ashikaga period was the age of arms an...
Enlightenment Is Beyond Description And Analysis
In the foregoing chapters we have had several occasions to re...
The Progress And Hope Of Life
How many myriads of years have passed since the germs of life...
Origin Of Zen In India
To-day Zen as a living faith can be found in its pure form on...
The Courage And The Composure Of Mind Of The Zen Monk And Of The Samurai
Fourthly, our Samurai encountered death, as is well known, wi...
Life Consists In Conflict
Life consists in conflict. So long as man remains a social a...
Man Is Good-natured According To Mencius
Oriental scholars, especially the Chinese men of letters, se...
Scripture Is No More Than Waste Paper
[FN#107] Zen is not based on any particular sutra, either of...
Nature And Her Lesson
Nature offers us nectar and ambrosia every day, and everywher...
In addition to these considerations, which mainly depend on i...
Life And Change
A peculiar phase of life is change which appears in the form ...
The Second And The Third Patriarchs
After the death of the First Patriarch, in A.D. 528, Hwui Ko ...
Idealistic Scepticism Concerning Religion And Morality
Similarly, it is the case with religion and morality. If we ...
Bodhidharma's Disciples And The Transmission Of The Law[fn#31]
[FN#31] For details, see Chwen Tang Luh and Den Ka Roku, b...
The Social State Of Japan When Zen Was Established By Ei-sai And Do-gen
Now we have to observe the condition of the country when Zen ...
Zen And Nirvana
The beatitude of Zen is Nirvana, not in the Hinayanistic sens...
Life In The Concrete
Life in the concrete, which we are living, greatly differs fr...
Zen And Supernatural Power
Yoga[FN#250] claims that various supernatural powers can be a...
There Is No Mortal Who Is Purely Moral
By nature man should be either good or bad; or he should be good as
well as bad; or he should be neither good nor bad. There can be no
alternative possible besides these four propositions, none of which
can be accepted as true. Then there must be some misconception in
the terms of which they consist. It would seem to some that the
error can be avoided by limiting the sense of the term 'man,' saying
some persons are good-natured, some persons are bad-natured, some
persons are good-natured and bad-natured as well, and some persons
are neither good-natured nor bad-natured. There is no contradiction
in these modified propositions, but still they fail to explain the
ethical state of man. Supposing them all to be true, let us assume
that there are the four classes of people: (1) Those who are purely
moral and have no immoral disposition; (2) those who are half moral
and half immoral; (3) those who are neither moral nor immoral; (4)
those who are purely immoral and have no moral disposition. Orthodox
Christians, believing in the sinlessness of Jesus, would say he
belongs to the first class, while Mohammedans and Buddhists, who
deify the founder of their respective faith, would in such case
regard their founder as the purely moral personage. But are your
beliefs, we should ask, based on historical fact? Can you say that
such traditional and self-contradictory records as the four gospels
are history in the strict sense of the term? Can you assert that
those traditions which deify Mohammed and Shakya are the statements
of bare facts? Is not Jesus an abstraction and an ideal, entirely
different from a concrete carpenter's son, who fed on the same kind
of food, sheltered himself in the same kind of building, suffered
from the same kind of pain, was fired by the same kind of anger,
stung by the same kind of lust as our own? Can you say the person
who fought many a sanguinary battle, who got through many cunning
negotiations with enemies and friends, who personally experienced the
troubles of polygamy, was a person sinless and divine? We might
allow that these ancient sages are superhuman and divine, then our
classification has no business with them, because they do not
properly belong to mankind. Now, then, who can point out any sinless
person in the present world? Is it not a fact that the more virtuous
one grows the more sinful he feels himself? If there be any mortal,
in the past, the present, and the future, who declares himself to be
pure and sinless, his very declaration proves that he is not highly
moral. Therefore the existence of the first class of people is open
Next: There Is No Mortal Who Is Non-moral Or Purely Immoral
Previous: Man Is Neither Good-natured Nor Bad-natured According To Su Shih