Nagarjuna was a great contributor to the Mahayana tradition.
Nagarjuna was a great contributor to the Mahayana tradition. He acted as the interpreter and clarifier of the tradition's texts clarifying the notion of the Middle way as offered and taught by Buddha. Nagarjuna's system of the Middle Way greatly influenced not only the Mahayana tradition but also would influence the future developing schools of thought that would originate from the Mahayana Buddhist tradition, namely the Zen Buddhist tradition. Nagarjuna's philosophy of the Middle Way is manifested in the methods of the Zen Buddhist tradition. There are fundamental elements in Nagarjuna's philosophy of the Middle Way that are manifested in the Zen Buddhist tradition and way of thought. A case can be made for the Zen tradition being a practical application of Nagarjuna's Middle Way. Hsueh-li Cheng in one of his published works has already explored the proposition that Zen is a practical application of the Middle Way in 1979.1 The aim of this paper is to build upon the foundation Hsueh-li Cheng has already laid down to bring closer the ties of a notion of a Middle Way in the thought of Nagarjuna and Zen. The approach taken will examine how the central tenets of the Middle Way as described by Nagarjuna are manifested in the application of Zen discipline. The teachings that will be highlighted from Nagarjuna's philosophy of the Middle Way will be emptiness (sunyata), the Twofold Truth, and reductio ad absurdum. The Middle Way's central teaching of emptiness is also found in the Zen disciple, and the two teachings of the Twofold Truth and reductio ad absurdum will be seen as practically applied in the Zen tradition's balanced way of life and discipline in their search for enlightenment.
The notion of what the Middle Way means in regards to the Buddhist Tradition, Madhyamika Buddhist Tradition (tradition based on Nagarjuna's Middle Way), and the Zen Buddhist Tradition will first be examined. The understanding of the Buddhist tradition in regards to the middle way is fundamental to understand and comprehending where Nagarjuna's philosophy developed from and how Zen tradition developed under this influence. The fundamental basis of Buddhism is the eradication of suffering (duhkha). The Buddha through his teaching offered the pathway in which the cessation of duhkha could be realized. Buddha explained that duhkha arises from craving that is rooted in ignorance. Upon the eradication of ignorance through following the Four Noble Truths one could reach Nirvana, where suffering is extinct and eternal joy will be realized. A key component to rid oneself of ignorance is to remove extremes and the dualistic way of viewing life. Many of the Buddha's teachings emphasized the idea of 'a middle way' in order to steer one away from falling into the trap of the extremes. As noted by Ramanan the Buddha emphasized right views as being the first element of the Eightfold Path, thus stressing the idea to keep away from extremes in both the moral sense and sense of correct understanding (48). A fundamental doctrine of Buddhist thought, dependent origination (paticcasamuppada), also expresses a middle way of thought. The principle of dependent origination is explained in the Samyutta-nikaya, II. 65: "When that is, this becomes; from the arising of that, this arises. When that is not, this does not become; from the cessation of that, this ceases" (Carter, 24). Dependent origination is the interdependent manner in which changes, actions, and people are mutually causative. In the realization that all things are interconnected there is an elimination from falling into the trap between the two extremes of annihilationism and eternalism. This main teaching of dependent origination and Buddha's other teachings were to become expanded upon, reinterpreted, and incorporated into the future Buddhist texts and schools of thought, such as Nagarjuna's Middle Way and the Zen Buddhist tradition, as the Buddhist tradition underwent the process of cumulative tradition.
The emergence of Mahayana Buddhist preserved the early Buddhist position of dependent origination and sought to preserve Buddha's teachings through a collection of sutras, which are alleged to be his true words, such as the Saddharmapundarika Sutra (Lotus Sutra) and the Prajnaparamita sutras (Perfection of Wisdom Sutras). The Prajnaparamita literature concentrates on the idea of a perfect wisdom that recognizes all views and constructs as empty (sunya). This idea of emptiness was to become one of Nagarjuna's main focuses of study in his explication of Buddha's teachings. His explanation of the Prajnaparamita sutras was what he considered to be the core of Buddha's teaching and offered early Mahayana Buddhists a lucid theoretical construct and foundation on which to build upon. For the Zen Buddhist tradition, it's ties with the Mahayana Buddhist tradition originates from the coming of the monk Bodhidharma to China during the early development of the Mahayana tradition. Bodhidharma under the influence of the Mahayana tradition developed the Ch'an (Zen) Buddhist tradition in China where it then spread to Japan. Like Nagarjuna, Bodhidharma claimed that he was teaching in order to return to Buddha's true essence.
Nagarjuna expanded the Buddha's teaching of the 'Middle Way' to include religious and philosophical concerns, as well as Buddha's emphasis on a middle way of thought in terms of the way of life. The record of Nagarjuna's philosophy was recorded down in the Madhyamakakarika (Middle Stanzas) doctrine. The Middle Way can be described as the non-exclusive way. As explained by Ramanan on the Middle Way,
The non-exclusive understanding is the all-comprehensive prajña. This is the same as
the Middle Way that rises above extremes and hence above exclusiveness, [...] A middle
way that does not open up the truth of things ceases to be the middle and ceases also to be
the way.2
The middle way is going between the claims of eternalism and annihilationism by rejecting both extremes, and this is prajña. In eliminating the idea that an entity or proposition has it's own being the truth of its emptiness has been revealed, and thus the middle way has been recognized. In Nagarjuna's philosophy prajna is equivalent to sunyata because there is no distinction between transcendental wisdom and emptiness. Sunyata and prajna are one in the same. In other words, because emptiness eliminates the discrimination between the real and unreal, realizes the non-dualistic, and therefore allows one to rise above the extremes of everyday life one has found the middle way and the middle way is transcendental wisdom. Nagarjuna emphasized this idea of sunyata in the Madhyamakakarika doctrine. In this doctrine are many different interpretations of sunyata however, as suggested by Richards, they all have the same fundamental view, which is that all things that are considered 'real' are actually void of own being (svabhava) from the standpoint of transcendental wisdom (prajna). If one realizes that all things are devoid of their own being there are no extremes because all is empty. Sunyata (emptiness) allows one to see the truth that all is empty of own being and this is prajna, which is the Middle Way.
As commented by Cheng, for San-lun (Madhyamika) Buddhist followers the teaching of emptiness as given by the Middle Stanzas is considered to encompass one's way of life, feeling, and thinking ('Nagarjuna', 71). In terms of lifestyle Madhyamika Buddhist see the ascetic way of life as an extreme and the hedonistic lifestyle extreme, therefore one seeks the notion of a middle way. To be rid oneself of either of these extremes is prepare a life where one may live the Middle Way through the doctrine of emptiness. To become free of all extremes one must be free from the ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
As commented by Cheng, for San-lun (Madhyamika) Buddhist followers the teaching of emptiness as given by the Middle Stanzas is considered to encompass one's way of life, feeling, and thinking ('Nagarjuna', 71). In terms of lifestyle Madhyamika Buddhist see the ascetic way of life as an extreme and the hedonistic lifestyle extreme, therefore one seeks the notion of a middle way. To be rid oneself of either of these extremes is prepare a life where one may live the Middle Way through the doctrine of emptiness. To become free of all extremes one must be free from the concept of 'is' and of 'is not'. This is a dualistic way of thinking. The removal of the dualistic mindset requires purification of the mind so that one is free of emotional/intellectual attachments and viewpoints. One must be cautious in trying to reach sunyata for one may fall into the dualistic mindset and see sunyata as itself a viewpoint. When being confronted by this it must be remembered that although sunyata breaks down and exposes the limitations of viewpoints it does not mean that sunyata itself becomes a viewpoint. As commented by Richards, "To be aware of and to indicate the limitations of all drsti is not in itself necessarily a dristi".3 Even sunyata is empty, therefore it cannot be a viewpoint.
As emptiness is crucial for Nagarjuna's Middle Way so it too has importance in the Zen Buddhist tradition. It is written by S. Suzuki , a Zen Soto master, to understand Buddhism one has to give up the concept of existence and he writes, "We say true existence comes from emptiness and goes back again into emptiness. What appears from emptiness is true existence. We have to go through emptiness."4 As shown, for one to reach enlightenment one's mind must be free of attachments and duality. When one severs the ties of attachment and duality emptiness is the result. Only when emptiness is realized can one's mind attain freedom from its confines. No-mind or no-self are the terms used to describe this state of emptiness. Each Zen follower must remove all conceptual attachments in order to directly experience no-mind. When one can see that everything is a part of emptiness then one is able to have non-attachment to any existence and then the mind is free, which is sunyata.
In the Zen tradition to accomplish the no-mind and do away between the two opposing extremes of the finite and infinite, one must get rid of the dualistic way of thinking. This balance is to be achieved not with intellect but a higher means. As mentioned by D.T. Suzuki, intellect is what brought to light man's constant struggle between the two extremes, but offers no solution ("Selected Writings", 8). What Zen proffers is to go beyond intellect and see the solution through direct experience. If one foregoes intellect and the dualist way of reasoning through direct experience, it is realized that the unceasing struggle between the infinite and finite never existed. The balance to obtain the middle between the extremes is direct experience for the Zen Buddhist. As pointed out by Humphreys, "the Zen student, as a good Buddhist, treads a Middle Way between effort and letting go, between attachment without and attachment within".5 A follower of the Zen Buddhist tradition must have a mind that knows no discrimination, distinction, or difference. In Zen the mind does not perceive differences in the world but perceives it differently, in other words free of a dualistic mindset or the 'middle way'. How Zen uses direct experience to do away with the dualistic thought will be shown through a comparison between Zen Buddhist discipline and Nagarjuna's doctrine of the Twofold Truth as seen in the Middle Stanzas.
Nagarjuna develops the Twofold Truth to help steer people against claiming that teachings of Buddhism are being either nihilistic or absolutistic, and as a way to assist followers in knowing Buddha's Dharma (Cheng, "Zen", 347). The Twofold truth is rooted in the idea of sunyata in that it attempts to remove attachments and achieve a middle way of seeing the world. Sunyata is the path to achieve the middle way however it too is subjected to being framed within dualistic thought. Nagarjuna points out that the misinterpretation of sunyata as being either 'nonexistent' or 'nothingness' is seeing the term from a dualistic mindset. This misinterpretation stems from one not being able to see the distinction between the two doctrines of conventional and ultimate truth. Nagarjuna explains that there are two basic views in world, one stemming from conventional truth and the other ultimate truth. Through conventional truth one's outlook is discriminative and ignorant, where entities are perceived to have an independent existence from oneself. In terms of ultimate truth one's point of view consists of "insubstantiality, relativity, and emptiness" which allows one to re-evaluate the world without attachment (Cheng, "Zen" 347). Ultimate truth is not a truth that can be attained beyond conventional truth. Ultimate truth cannot be achieved because it is the simple acknowledgement that conventional truth is non-ultimate and conditional (McCagney, 75). To clarify what the Twofold Truth does, Chi-tsang, a ?????, offers a description of it on three levels:
(1) The first level is people of conventional truth believe that what they perceive in the world has a true and absolute nature; where all of reality and dharmas have a being. Whereas, people of ultimate truth believe that all dharmas are empty.
(2) Level two is realizing conventional contains both non-being and being, whereas ultimate truth contains neither being nor non-being (non-duality). From this second level, the first level of seeing doctrines of conventional and ultimate truth as absolute can be credited to the sphere of worldly truth and the idea of being or non-being is seen as an assertion of two extremes.
(3) On the third level worldly truth consists of duality and non-duality, where the ultimate truth is neither duality nor non-duality. From this third position the two previous levels are levels of extremes, and by staying away from them it is ultimate truth or the Middle Way (Cheng, "Zen", 349).
As explained above the Twofold Truth is a way to realize and eliminate the claims of either absolutism either nihilism, allowing a 'middle way'. Thus the accusation that sunyata means either 'nonexistence' or 'nothingness' is looking at it from through the viewpoint of conventional truth. The explanation of levels to free one's mind from conceptual attachments, as given by Chi-tsang, is a way to just conceptualize and articulate how the Twofold Truth can deepen one's quest for prajna and not a set description of the levels one may progress through. As one progresses through the doctrine of the Twofold truth one can progress through an infinite number of levels as one strives to realize ultimate truth. The doctrine of ultimate truth and conventional truth are complementary to one another, and when one is able to understand the ultimate truth nirvana can then be achieved.
The practical application of Nagarjuna's Twofold Truth can be seen through Zen discipline and method. When considering this proposition one must look at the basic ideas of the Twofold Truth being represented in Zen Buddhist monastic living. Zen monks live in a world of conventional truth and attempt, through their discipline, to break through their mindset that this world is non-ultimate and conditional and therefore be released from all attachments so that they may attain enlightenment.
The early Zen masters by themselves were able to reach enlightenment through the process of spiritual reflection and searching. With the complexity of modern times it has become almost impossible for one to attain satori solely and the development of Zen discipline training resulted. In the Zen Buddhist tradition one must seek Zen, Zen does not come to you. Before a follower discovers Zen they are a common person one lives in a life of ignorance, attachment, and dualistic human intellect. The beginnings of a Zen follower coincides with the description of Level 1 of the Twofold Truth where one sees all things as having a real and absolute nature. For one to seek out Zen there first must be a recognition that there is something missing in one's existence and this creates the Great Doubt. The Great Doubt is one of three conditions that are particularly emphasized in order to join Zen training as described by Shibayma, "To have the Great Doubt ?Spiritual Quest?which will be the prajna (true wisdom) basis in searching for the Truth".6 The Great Doubt is the recognition that there is more to the world than attachments and dualistic thought in life. The Great Doubt that drives a follower to Zen discipline, is similar to level two of Nagarjuna's Twofold Truth, where one begins to realize the limitations of one's dualistic thinking in conventional truth. For Zen monks they continue to live in 'conventional truth', trying to eliminate discrimination and ignorance through one's rigorous training in Zen life. In Zen discipline there are two sects that emphasize differently the experiential component of Zen training to attain enlightenment, the Rinzai and Soto. Both sects do emphasize the need for the Great Doubt and one's personal involvement in order to attain enlightenment, however enlightenment is realized through two different methodologies. In regards to enlightenment in terms of the Rinzai sect, who stress the use of the koan method, one empties one's mind through the emphasis on solving the koan. The Zen student undergoes great discipline to free the mind and does koan meditation, sazen, sesshins, and zazen. Although it is described simplistically here Zen Buddhist discipline is arduous and pushes its followers to their limits in order for them to reach enlightenment. After such great discipline one may have been able to reach the moment of enlightenment and attain no-form and no-mind, emptiness. When this occurs 'conventional truth' has been abolished and enlightenment has been realized. This can be compared to the description of the third level of Nagarjuna's Twofold Truth when the point of enlightenment occurs because one recognizes that conventional truth is a worldly truth from the standpoint of ultimate truth. The Rinzai sect's way of life can be seen through a reductionist sense as applying and living out Nagarjuna's Twofold Truth.
As stated earlier, there are two main sects of Zen in which student may choose from, the Rinzai and Soto. Rinzai Zen stresses the use of the koan to reach enlightenment whereas Soto Zen emphasizes zazen for enlightenment. As described by Rinzai master D.T. Suzuki in his comment on satori, "The intensity of this feeling is proportional to the amount of effort the opener of satori has put into the achievement. For there is a gradation in satori as to its intensity".7 This increasing intensity of enlightenment as described by Suzuki is also seen in Soto Zen, where one strives to deepen enlightenment through zazen. "According to Dogen a little training is already shallow enlightenment, just as thorough training is deep enlightenment."8 In both sects of Zen one strives to deepen enlightenment through one's personal experiences in the discipline. Zen is personal and different followers' depths of enlightenment as they progress through their discipline will vary. Like that of the Twofold Truth, for Zen followers there can be many different levels in which one may be in the pursuit of enlightenment, however it lives out the Twofold Truth. Zen offers more of an experiential method for the follower using discipline and Zen is a way of life in the pursuit for emptiness.
A greater comparison between the attainment of Nagarjuna's ultimate truth and Zen's satori can be emphasized. To reiterate from above, ultimate truth is the recognition and awareness of conventional truth for what it is non-ultimate and conditional. Once ultimate truth has been realized one can go about the phenomenal world and re-evaluate it without attachments. In other words, it can be seen as if one has been 'reborn' in this world for the outlook has completely altered and one now can see the world for what it truly is. There is a stress on a here and now, versus an afterlife. This too occurs in Zen for the time to reach enlightenment is now. In Zen it is said that the goal of training is to die while alive. Shido Bunan offers a waka poem:
Die while alive, and be completely dead,
Then do whatever you will, all is good.9
As explained by Shibayama, when one has died in Zen it is the point where he/she has transitioned into the self of both no-form and no-mind. The person is then revived as having no-form and no-mind, thus they have become the True-self (46). One can attain True-self in the present and take part in it from this level of enlightenment, just as one who realizes Ultimate Truth can look and re-evaluate the world without attachments.
The Zen discipline as argued can be seen as the practical application of Nagarjuna's Twofold Truth. This comparison of the application of the Twofold Truth to Zen discipline is extremely simplistic and a reductionist way of seeing how the Middle Way and Zen connect together as a philosophy and way of life. For it is recognized that for both the follower of the Middle Way and the Zen student there will be many different levels of understanding and spiritual development that cannot be easily split into levels of realization and then stitched together as demonstrated above. This was done to articulate how closely Zen way of life can be seen as the practical application of the Twofold Truth. Another key component that emphasizes a middle way of thinking like that of the Twofold Truth is Nagarjuna's use of reductio ad absurdum.
Nagarjuna's uses the contradictory arguments, reductio ad absurdum, to show that the idea of the absoluteness of an entity or view is a contradiction in itself. Tachikawa offers a description of this method:
Reductio ad absurdum is a method of argument whereby the truth of one's
probandum proposition p is demonstrated when the negation of p and assertion of p' lead to an obviously false conclusion.10
In reductio ad absurdum the proposition that was thought of as having an absolute entity is proven to be absurd and thus the view is rejected. An example of the use of this method is found in the Mulamadhyamakakarika XXI, 12. This stanza begins with the proposition that entities must originate from existent things.
A being is not born by itself nor born by another,
Nor by both itself and another. It is born by what?11
In analyzing the proposition it can be seen that if entities begin from themselves then they would go on reproducing and one would end up with the reproductions of the same existing entities. The reductio ad absurdum argument, as clarified by Santina, points out that if entities already exist they do not originate from themselves or another. If they do not originate from themselves because they already exist then the origination of an entity that already exists by itself or another is obviously absurd (Chp. 20). In the words of Ramanan "The negative conclusions belong not to him but to those whose propositions are under examination [...] the imagined absoluteness of what is only relative is rejected and at the same time relativity is revealed as its true nature" (Ramanan, 42).12 Since the proposition has been revealed as one that contradicts itself, it cannot be true, for if something negates itself there is no way it can be absolute, and now what is left of the relativity is its true nature, emptiness. Nagarjuna's use of reductio ad absurdum is to emphasize the futility in holding a certain viewpoint for there is no finite essence to reality and no paradigm for rationality, there is only sunyata.
In Nagarjuna's philosophy, the dialectical negation of Reductio ad absurdum, is a way in which people can overcome the confusion of the infinite and finite by seeing the limitation of their views once they are contradicted. What Nagarjuna proposed is what can be seen as an external mechanism that challenges one's mode of dualistic thought, find the middle of the extremes, and to see that all is empty and has no self-nature (svabhava). In examining reductio ad absurdum as a method of teaching one realizes that this is an external method; external in the sense that one's viewpoint (dristi) is shown to be absurd through the reductio ad absurdum's method and then the teaching is internally processed in one's mind.
The Zen koan method, emphasized in the Rinzai sect, is similar to that of reductio ad absurdum in that both methods are seen as a way to remove the idea of the finite and infinite using literal 'methods'. However, the koan method stresses sole introspection of the koan by the student versus the external method of reductio ad absurdum where the proposition is contradicted and then one must internalize the answer mentally after one is told of its absurdity. The similarity of the koan method to reductio ad absurdum stems from the influence of Nagarjuna's reductio ad absurdum and twofold truth on the Zen koan. As quoted by Heine on the koan, "It is a technique for spiritual attainment with 'no reliance on words and letters' (furyu monji) that is rooted in the basic Buddhist approach to silence on unedifying queries and related doctrinal developments, [...] [and]the basic Madhyamika dialectical negation and theory of two truths".13 Thus Nagarjuna's teaching of dialectical negation or reductio ad absurdum has had influence the Zen koan. What will proceed is an analyzation of how reductio ad absurdum has influenced the Zen Buddhist tradition's use of the koan in the Rinzai sect in order to reach enlightenment.
The koan was developed in China to revive the Zen tradition from becoming ossified and thus losing the essential experiential exponent, which is fundamental to Zen. D.T. Suzuki comments on what happens after a genius arrives and his experiences become systematized, "Most of us are not original and creative enough, we are satisfied with following the steps of a leader [...] The system thus gradually becomes ossified and unless there follows a period of revival, the original experiences die away".14 The koan was developed as an experiential tool and artificial method that assists Zen followers and helps guide them in the Zen personal experience; this is comparable to Nagarjuna's development of reductio ad absurdum.
As outlined above Nagarjuna's reductio ad absurdum has a set pattern or literary method in which to reject the absoluteness of a proposition or entity. The Zen koan, in the most basic explanation, is a riddle in the form of a phrase or saying which is so irrational that the dualistic mindset cannot comprehend or interpret it. An example of a koan is, "See your self before you were born!".15 This saying is so non-sensical, irrational, and absurd that the dualistic mind cannot grasps it's meaning. The koan cannot be explained as contradicting itself or rationalized. One must take the koan and personalize it into the self to transcend dualistic way of thinking. The koan creates a tension between the two levels of awareness, the rational and irrational (Heine, 365). Upon constant meditation and reflection of the koan one realizes the limitations of dualistic thinking and is driven to despair by it, therefore one strives to abolish this way of thinking and transcend it. Through the koan method the contradiction lies within the experience of despair for one realizes the pointless and limitations of a dualistic way of thinking and realizes that all along it has been the fetters of the mind. The use of the Zen koan offers a method of experiential contradiction that occurs within the self, which require a 'more rigorous method' of negation than reductio ad absurdum because the contradiction is realized within one's won thinking and internalized. The koan method has elevated the basis of reductio ad absurdum to a higher plane of personal experience and internalization.
As suggested from above, Rinzai Zen's use of the koan offers more of a hands on experience in the attempt to empty one's mind than the literal method of reductio ad absurdum as offered by Nagarjuna. However, it must be acknowledged that the Zen Soto tradition also works towards realizing the contradiction in one's conventional way of thinking. It can be proposed that Soto can possible offer an even greater experience oriented approach than that of the Rinzai, in order to empty one's mind. The fact that Soto Zen does not depend on any literal devices, like that of the koan or reductio ad absurdum, to aid in attaining no-mind suggest that Soto Zen offers more of an experiential approach to reject the dualistic mindset and attain emptiness. The Soto sect's emphasis is on zazen or sitting meditation. In attempting to cleanse the mind or as termed by S. Suzuki as 'a general house cleaning of your mind', one must not concentrate too hard on anything while in zazen, for right concentration means freedom (111). When one concentrates on something, such as breathing, one can forget oneself, however the converse can also occur, and if one forgets oneself then one will be concentrated on breathing. A delicate balance must be found when concentrating. The S. Suzuki offers a comment on how to attain emptiness through zazen, "Concentration means freedom. So your effort should be directed at nothing. [...] Just do as much as you can. If you continue this practice, eventually you will experience the true existence which comes from emptiness".16 This concentration on nothing is not only applied to the act of zazen. This mindfulness is supposed to carry over through all of the Zen student's daily activities and life so eventually emptiness will be experienced by the "whole being", unlike the stress on mental focusing of the koan in Rinzai. Thus for Soto Zen realizing the contradiction that reductio ad absurdum emphasizes is based completely on one's whole body, both physical and mental, experience, which can be argued as a more experiential based approach than that of the Rinzai for there is no metal device being used external from one's own mind.
The notion of a Middle Way is emphasized both in Nagarjuna's philosophy and that of the Zen Buddhist Tradition. The emphasis that emptiness is crucial to the attainment of a Middle Way is evident in both Nagarjuna's philosophy and Zen tradition. Zen not only emphasizes emptiness, but also offers a experiential method to achieve it particularly the living out of Nagarjuna's doctrines of the Twofold Truth and reductio ad absurdum. Zen offers a venue in where one may develop through personal experience the middle way philosophy, as proposed by Nagarjuna, and thus experience enlightenment that is sunyata and prajna.
Works Cited
Carter, John Ross. DI4890 Class Handout. St. Andrews University, March 4 2003.
Cheng, Hsueh-Li. "Nagarjuna, Kant and Wittgenstein: The San-Lun Madhyamika Exposition of Emptiness." Religious Studies 17 (1981): 67-85.
Cheng, Hsueh-Li. "Zen and San-Lun Madhyamika Thought: Exploring the Theoretical Foundation of Zen Teachings and Practices." Religious Studies 15 (1979): 343-363.
Heine, Steve. "Does the Koan Have Buddha-Nature? The Zen Koan as Religious Symbol." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 58 (1990): 357-387.
Humphreys, Christmas. Zen Buddhism. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd. 1961.
McGagney, Nancy. Nagarjuna and the Philosophy of Openness. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield 1997.
Ramanan, K. Venkata. Nagarjuna's Philosophy As Presented in The Maha-Prajñaparamita-Sastra. Varanasi: Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan 1971.
Richards, Glyn. "Sunyata: Objective Referent or Via Negativa?" Religious Studies 14 (1978): 251-260.
Santina, Peter Della. The Tree of Enlightenment An Introduction to the Major Traditions of Buddhism. 2003. 20 April. 2003. <http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~dsantina/tree/>
Shibayama, Abbot Zenkei. A Flower Does Not Talk Zen Essays. Charles E. Tuttle Company, 1997.
Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro. Essays in Zen Buddhism (Second Series). London: Rider and Company, 1950.
Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro Zen Buddhism Selected Writings of D.T. Suzuki, ed. William Barrett, New York: Image Doubleday Books, 1956.
Suzuki, Shunryu. Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind. New York: Weatherhill, Inc. 2001.
Tachikawa, Mussashi. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Nagarjuna. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1997.
Yokoi, Yuho, & Victoria, Daizen. Zen Master Dogen: An Introduction with Selected Writings. New York: John Weatherhill Inc., 1976.
To refer to this article, see Religious Studies, 'Zen and San-lun Madhyamika Thought: Exploring the Theoretical Foundation of Zen Teachings and Practices', volume 15, 1979, pp. 343-363.
2 K.V. Ramanan, Nagarjuna's Philosophy As Presented in The Maha-Prajñaparamita-Sastra, Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan 1971, 127.
3 Glyn Richards, 'Sunyata: Objective Referent or Via Negativa', Religious Studies, v.14, Cambridge University Press 1978, 256.
4 Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind, New York: Weatherhill, Inc. 2001, 110.
5 Christopher Humphreys, Zen Buddhism, Unwin Books 1961, 93.
6 For further elaboration on the three conditions to join Zen monastic life please refer to A Flower Does Not Talk.
Abbot Zenkei Shibayama, A Flower Does Not Talk, Charles E. Tuttles Company Inc. 1970, 40.
7 D.T. Suzuki, Zen Buddhism Selected Writings of D.T. Suzuki, ed. William Barret, Image Books Doubleday 1956, 97.
8 Yokoi &Victoria, Zen Master Dogen, John Weatherhill Inc. 1976,19.
9 Quoted in Abbot Zenkei Shibayama, A Flower Does Not Talk, The Charles E. Tuttle Company Inc 1970, 46.
0 Musashi Tachikawa, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Nagarjuna, Motilal Banarsidass 1997, 57.
1 Found in Nancy McCagney, Nagarjuna and the Philosophy of Openness, Rowman & Littlefield Inc 1997,190.
2 K.V. Ramanan, Nagarjuna's Philosophy As Presented in The Maha-Prajñaparamita-Sastra, Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan 1971, 127.
3 Steven Heine, 'Does the Koan Have Buddha-Nature? The Zen Koan as Religious Symbol', Journal of American Academy of Religion, v. 58, 1990, 360.
4 Daisetez Teitaro Suzuki, Essay in Zen Buddhism, ed. Christmas Humphreys, Rider and Company 1950, 81.
5 Abbot Zenkei Shibayama, A Flower Does Not Talk, Charles E. Tuttles Company Inc. 1970, 43.
6 Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind. New York: Weatherhill, Inc. 2001, 113.
Duong
