japlady@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rebecca Radnor) (04/23/91)
In response to the question concerning the zen saying, "when hungry eat, when tired sleep"; I think the the moi most important issue here is not finding some rationalyzation for zen 'philosophy' but the state of mind of the inquirer. Most of our thinking is dualistic in nature (actually all of it) and this includes our questions about why this and why that. Of what concern is it of anybodies anybody's that some zen master said one thing or another? This is just grasping at words. A more important question is "am I identifying with any tradition, and why is there this identification?" Of course we "identify" because of a basic need for foundations. And this arises because of the insecurity of the 'self' thaty is thrown into an alienatiing world. All of this presupposes that there is a self and other relationship. So, instead of asking why sit or someone said such and such, you might want to investigate your own presuppositions, i.e., what you are attached to and why. Are you assuming a 'you' that has a reality above and beyond conventional dic discourse? Of course, our famous zen masters would say I am attached to philosophyzing and this might be true. A better 'answer ' might be "just sit for sitting's sake." As for your answer to your question I think is it is a good one in terms of explaining the relationship between zen doctrine and zen practice. However, when doctrine and practice are 'two' we are still operating on the plane of ordinary life (as 'opposed to ultimate truth'? The Buddhists say when ultimate truth is realized there is no dual relationship between ordinary and ultimate). So if you're hungry right now ah have something to eat. (I'm using a girlfriend's (my roommate) account. My name is J. Cha grad student of Buddhist Philosophy at N.U. If you respond to japlady's account I will receive it. My true interest <and topic of study> is Nagarjuna's Madhyamika philosophy <and for you specialists, the Prasanga tradition of Candrakirti>.