Masao Abe

God, Emptiness, and the True Self

A Zen master said, ‘Wash out your mouth after you utter the word Buddha.’ Another master said, ‘There is one word I do not like to hear, and that is Buddha.’ Wu-tsu Fa-yen (Jap.: Hōen, d. 1104), a Chinese Zen master of the Sung dynasty, said, ‘Buddhas and Patriarchs are your deadly enemies; satori is nothing but dust on the mind. Rather be a man who does nothing, just leisurely passing the time. Be like a deaf-mute in the world of sounds and colors.’ At the close of his life, Daitō (1282–1338) of the Kamakura era of Japan left the following death verse: I have cut off Buddhas and Patriarchs; The Blown Hair (Sword) is always burnished; When the wheel turns, The empty void gnashes its teeth.

A Dynamic Unity in Religious Pluralism: A Proposal from the Buddhist Point of View

Religious pluralism is a remarkable cultural and religious phenomenon in our time and one of the important issues to be addressed by religious thinkers and writers of all traditions today. The ‘challenge of religious pluralism’ has thus been discussed extensively in recent years. In this respect I would like to make the following two points.

The Self in Jung and Zen

The most conspicuous difference between Buddhism and Western psychology is perhaps found in their respective treatments of the concept of ‘self.’ In Western psychology, the existence of a ‘self’ is generally affirmed; Buddhism denies the existence of an enduring ‘self’ and substitutes instead the concept of anātman, ‘no-self.’

Religious Tolerance and Human Rights: A Buddhist Perspective

In February 1985, I was asked by Professor Leonard Swidler to submit, from a Buddhist standpoint, a paper on the subject, ‘Religious Tolerance and Human Rights,’ and to present it at the Conference on Human Rights. Upon carefully reading the attached documents explaining the issues to be discussed at this conference and their implications, I felt I must attempt to make a response for two reasons. First, the issue of the relationship between human rights and religious freedom is one of the most urgent issues in contemporary human society; it is an issue that religious thinkers in particular can no longer ignore. Second, this issue derives fundamentally from the problematic innate in human existence and in the nature of ‘religion’ itself. Consequently, the problem of the relationship between religious tolerance and human rights cannot be easily resolved, however urgent the issue may be.

Zen Is not a Philosophy, but…

Religion is difficult to understand with sufficient depth and subtlety. Zen is no exception. In one sense, Zen may be said to be one of the most difficult religions to understand, for there is no formulated Zen doctrine or theological system by which one may intellectually approach it. Accordingly, it is not surprising to find various superficial understandings or misunderstandings of Zen among Westerners interested in Zen, whose cultural and religious traditions are entirely different from those in which Zen has developed.

Dōgen on Buddha-Nature

Dōgen (1200–53) is one of the most outstanding and distinctive figures in the history of Japanese Buddhism. He is unique in at least the following three senses.

The Impact of Dialogue with Christianity on My Self-Understanding as a Buddhist

I have been asked to talk about the theme, ‘The Impact of Dialogue with Christianity on my self-understanding as a Buddhist’. Although I am a Buddhist I have been interested in Christianity and Western philosophy from my student days. However, I began a dialogue with Christianity publicly in 1963, when I published an article, ‘Buddhism and Christianity as a Problem of Today’ in the journal Japanese Religions.1 To my pleasant surprise, there came to me many sincere echoes from the West of this small voice in a corner of the East. These responses are the starting point of the ‘Symposium on Buddhism and Christianity’ which was published in the subsequent issues of Japanese Religions2 in the following several years.

Zen and Western Thought

‘Zen and Western Thought’ is one of the intellectual areas which must by all means be studied and elucidated in today’s world. And yet it is an extremely difficult subject. To deal, in all its ramifications, with this theme which is so vast and difficult to grasp in its core, is quite beyond the powers of the present writer. I shall attempt here only a preliminary sketch with the hope that I can revise it in the future after I have obtained the criticisms of my learned readers.

The Core of Zen: The Ordinary Mind is Tao

What is Zen? To answer this question, words are not always needed or altogether adequate. One may answer the question by lifting one’s finger or pounding on a desk with one’s fist or just by maintaining perfect silence. These are non-verbal answers to the question, ‘What is Zen?’ — the true expression of that which ultimately resides beyond words and intellectual analysis.

Double Negation as an Essential for Attaining the Ultimate Reality: Comparing Tillich and Buddhism

Robert Scharlemann states, ‘It might be argued that the polarity of being and nonbeing in Tillich’s ontological structure is not meant to be the same as the polarity of being and nothing’ in Buddhism. He also points out that ‘there seems to be a clear difference in the predications being made’ in these two cases. So far, I understand that Scharlemann agrees with me in making a distinction between God and śūnyatā in terms of being and nothingness. However, in this connection we must clarify what that difference really means and what is the cause of the difference. These are crucial points of the present discussion.