Stoicism

Though Stoicism, questing for ataraxia, unperturbed calm tranquility untroubled by mental or emotional disquiet, the transcendently detached and balanced state of mind free and indifferent from worry or any other preoccupation, is Rationalistic and Zen Intuitionist, otherwise the two creeds run fairly parallel in several regards: 

Renouncing hedonistic free pleasure seeking, Stoicism contended that by choice of free will, self-control and fortitude the wise man should master and become free of and apathetically indifferent to the errors of passion and desire, such being the enemy of clear and unbiased reason, hence unsubdued by joy or grief, happiness in achieving virtue via reason, and willingly submissive to natural law order by the divine of the entirely corporeal and material world to ultimate good in equality and the brotherhood of man.

In popular culture, the ancient Roman Stoics are, of course, the model for the ever logical Vulcans on 'Star Trek.'

Although, far from placid dignity, indeed much as the most notorious Zen sages clearly loved to stir the pot, some Stoics actually took perverse joy in whatever shock value from publicly flouting common (or as me might say today: Bourgeois) manners, mores and taboos, as silly, irrational and entirely arbitrary.

Nevertheless, not merely in sheer Reductionism rests the failure of phoneme theory, but in the Phenomena of memory association and the nature of communication as a human behavior, after all consisting not merely in description, instruction and assertion, all variously Ontological reference, striving nigh transcendentally for precision and clarity in the quest for truth, but also of expression and intention, ambiguity, inner response to life without distinct objective external correspondence.

Understanding one another then, may often only be conjectural, approximate and verisimilitudinous at very best. But then, what knowledge isn't?  Science, on this score, remains sanguine, cheerfully confident, optimistic and content if not actually somewhat smug.

But what of the Zen? Now, there can be a Zen of any solitary art, archery, motorcycle maintenance, or anything else. But can there be a Zen of graceful interactions, especially such as by which people are ever thought to relate to one another? Indeed, is the cultivation of dharma in the behavioral sense, just such, a quest for the same insight of spontaneous authenticity striven for in Transactional Analysis between individuals? Is Transactional Analysis a properly dharmic (in the behavioral sense) liberation from karma? Or is the cultivation of dharma in the behavioral sense, rather a questing for impersonally cold-blooded perfection in dealing with others? Indeed, must Zen prize or reject the same insight of spontaneous authenticity striven for in Transactional Analysis between individuals? Indeed, strictly speaking, can Zen ever even recognize as possible any insight of spontaneous authenticity striven for in Transactional Analysis between individuals? After all, bypassing, exchange which is not genuine communication because it lacks sufficient intersubjectivity and does not carry at all the same meanings or even purpose, intention or point at all between the participants, is all there really is, according to the Zen, traditionally.

According to Zen, individuals may be perfectly genuine, but dialogue, let alone the attachment snare of relationship, never can be genuine or true. Hence, Zen must regard Transactional Analysis as quixotically futile. For only the individual quelled into behavioral dharma can conceivably ever be however cold-bloodedly receptive to others, according to Zen.

Transactional Analysis quests and strives in the cultivation of more intuitive interaction intrinsic to more genuine relationship between individuals. But the however optimistic Nihilistic value-destruction of Zen nevertheless scorns all such attachment as relationship without distinction.

In the most Heraclitian Buddhist thinking nowadays the more current than ever in modern physics, all objects, phenomena or other events are deemed empty of self sufficient inherency which illusory. For example, the hardest rock cannot really be inherently solid in and of itself, save that it cannot readily interpenetrate any other solid mass, because to exist is to be effective upon anything else at all at large.

In accordance with the law of unity of opposites which describes in matters of perspective, the underlying unity as well as the manifest polarity of things, events and processes, Zen and Buddhism partake of a controversy and synthesis (systems theory) familiar in science and philosophy, that of profound marvel delving into the reduction of anything and everything that exists or occurs to the smallest and most basic self sufficient monads, versus serene appreciation in contemplation of the universal Gestalt of all things and phenomena existing only contingently, in context, dependant upon conditioning factors, upon other things, hence empty of adequate independent self-existence and intrinsic properties.

All such, however, is relationship in a strictly dharmic view. Whereas for Zen, dialogue, literally from dia- "across" + legein "speak," let alone human relationship, remains all quite oxymoronic. And that is why Jews do not Zen. Zen and Judaism are intrinsically irreconcilable because, after all, the attachment and belonging of human relationship, a value so Nihilistically rejected by the solitary Zen, is, indeed, the very central focus of Judaism.

No wonder, then, that in Zen, conversation is less important as an exchange at all, than as a catalyst. Because, though each party can never be entirely on the same proverbial page, fortunately, they need not even be for the attainment of insight and even the achievement of personal growth! Indeed, the traditional humorous anecdotes of Zen are most often descriptive of stunning private insight, satori arising from outright miscommunication.

As when a monk humbly and fervently requested of the renowned Zen Master Zhaozhou Congshen to teach him:

Off handedly, Zhouzhou, appropriately never too full of himself and therefore for whom such moments, however auspicious to others, were by now quite, quite all routine, began by graciously concerning himself and enquiring of the monk, his guest after all, "Have you eaten your meal?" "Yes I have," replied the monk, dutifully. And so "Wash your bowl," instructed Zhaozhou casually, mindful only of the ordinary transitory passing moment and thinking little what from his own perspective was quite unremarkable.

And then, and then! by now already hanging ardently upon every word and pearl of wisdom out from the mouth of the great sage, from his own vastly heightened expectations, the monk projected and interpreted by far more than was ever intended by unwitting Zhouzhou himself, and thence awakened, entering effortlessly into his own Buddha nature lurking inside all along, in an ecstatic flash of inspiration, the monk attained satori, instantly becoming enlightened of mindfulness, heightened awareness in the enigmatic immediacy of Zen simplicity!

Now, did Zhouzhou quite unsuspecting and no doubt to his great delight, bare witness and share in the monk's happiness? Or, all the more comedic, did even the great sage, comfortable in his own routine, remain entirely oblivious and innocent of the momentous event that had transpired, no matter the sagacity accrued by his illuminated disciple of the second, the muddled monk? Did Zhouzhou and the monk ever truly connect or forever only bypass? And does it matter either way, if both should show their hearts and neither see, if nevertheless they are content and in accord? For in Zen, the important truths, universally human as they may be, are only to be found within, all along.

Indeed, the notorious Zenslap, even masterfully executed, adds nothing, but only connects unassociated thoughts into fresh realizations, even if need be, of the obvious.

In the words of Rebecca West "Any authentic work of art must start an argument between the artist and his audience." for, to quote Michel Eyquem de Montaigne "The word is half his that speaks, and half his that hears it." But more than this, in modern Western artistic sensibility, the very ambiguity of just such fusion is seen to validate shared experience even from differing perspectives, of that larger event, the interaction which is communication. However, in Zen, the differences between the two sides of the exchange, regardless of whatever balanced counterpoint in which they are perceived together participating, signifies far less, but merely demonstrates the futility and illusion of communication at all, save, with random luck, interaction and even misunderstanding as catalyst for individual satori.

For Zen, thus all such metaphorical argument is not Dialectic but at best, merely Heraclitian. All despite the observable cycles or renewal in societies that so closely parallel that of the individual psyche. Regardless, also of all profound immediacy of individual experience in any social historical context whatsoever, the intersubjectivity nevertheless remaining conjectural, approximate and verisimilitudinous at best, hence to be scorned by Zen as somehow inauthentic.

Hair splitting and the painstaking negotiation of reciprocal incomprehension have no place in the Zen, given that originality and novelty are taken as entirely subjective inspiration, intransmissible, with, objectively, Ontologically, no new thing under the sun.

The skilled Zen master helps to bring about the causes and conditions of insight, which, nevertheless, remains subjective and solitary. Indeed, the vantage for such awakening is never far for anyone.

"Where ever you go, there you are!" -Buckaroo Banzai

Zen criticism? 

Zen, after all, remains a field of inquiry and controversy within which different views even as to the nature of Zen itself are known to clash, spark and contend, and over human problems that must honestly stick in ones craw,, impossible neither to swallow nor to expel.

And so, orthodoxy may be rejected even along with oppressive demands for unity.

Zen Nihilism so bleakly insists that the instant even to speak about anything, one is only doomed to miss the mark. Whereas, rational skeptical science and philosophy frankly lower any such impossible bar of perfection, spurning the futility of mythic unpremeditation, optimistically enacting any hope that the more we examine and discuss any phenomena, the closer thereby we may draw to experience the joy of better understanding thereof.

Zen confounds first the Prime Directive and then Zen itself!

After all, the observers observe and influence one another, not any other distinct object. Hence the sheer vanity of any Isolationist mythic 'Star Trek' Prime Directive of non intervention! We are all one and part of nature, anyhow, according to Zen. For as Werner Heisenberg pointed out, another's perspective at all, even simply being observed, can be profoundly disturbing in however minute it's impact!

In accordance with the law of unity of opposites which describes in matters of perspective, the underlying unity as well as the manifest polarity of things, events and processes, Zen and Buddhism partake of a controversy and synthesis (systems theory) familiar in science and philosophy, that of profound marvel delving into the reduction of anything and everything that exists or occurs to the smallest and most basic self sufficient monads, versus serene appreciation in contemplation of the universal Gestalt of all things and phenomena existing only contingently, in context, dependant upon conditioning factors, upon other things, hence empty of adequate independent self-existence and intrinsic properties.

Doing no harm is impossible, then, save not only by the rejection of ideological extremes, but also by committed benevolence. Indeed, is not the hottest circle of Dante's Inferno reserved for those who cultivate neutrality during moral crisis? Because by standing in the face of suffering cannot be harmless! Only thus does Zen obtain the devout compassion of Buddhist Universalism, for which Zen austerity and brainwashed fatalism gone war-like and cruel must and indeed should forever stick in the craw of collective memory and conscience.

But then, thereby, is not Zen cessation of attachment and relation then itself an illusion?

Indeed, since when is anything so Reactionary as Isolationism, the damnable paralytic sin of Zen indifference politicized, a Leftist bleeding-heart Liberal Progressive agenda?  We can thank Noam Chomsky, George Orwell's Renegade Liberal par excellence, who has never met a Communist despot he didn't like. For to quote Carl von Clausewitz: "The conqueror is always a lover of peace; he would prefer to take over our country unopposed."

Such intuitionist transcendence of ego and intellect as in Zen detachment obviously flies in direct opposition to any ideal of any Hellenized Jewish intellectual transcendence of brutishness, I and thou, deep thinking, attachment to and regard of principles or values of Universalism such as justice to occupy the minds of the righteous, only intellectual detachment in service to compassionate involvement even amid the temporal world of iniquity, integrity from the quest for fortitude in decency, to be a Mensch, in short, indeed, the very embrace of all that Zen Stoicism seemingly flees to escape. 

So, what unity or convergence can there ever be found in in these manifest polar opposites, particularly? Only, if ever, in the dawning of responsibility.

Explanation is irrelevant...

-As the mythically sinister Borg might intone...

The poetical sensibility of Zen strives for clarity and preciseness of allegorical imagery, pointing to that which defies direct description, all in the ardent cultivation of immediacy and awakening to mindful heightened awareness of experience, and thence the rejection of conceptualization as burdensome self-conscious encumbrance and suffering, wherein the Zen quests for the complete abandonment of understanding as such. The draw of cult initiation into the quest for enlightenment and the snares exploitation alike, is in the hope that with perseverance all that is nebulous, obscure and even dubious, will become intelligible and important later on.

But the truth is that imagery is hardly actually necessary to begin with for abstract thought, and indeed even seemingly somewhat unwieldy, indeed perhaps among the least practical of intellectual tools, but actually only the more challenging. And so, where is any advantage therein thereby? The answer is, emphatically, that the entire point of employing imagery symbolically or evocatively nevertheless remains in howsoever greater economy, stronger impression or greater familiarity with whatever selected images, than with whatever more difficult and as yet indistinct ideas represented for examination in order to be clarified.

Both Zen and Inductivism accept only personal experience, even if (very!) contrived by others, masters and educators, as the only true fit teacher, rejecting explanation as prone to error and therefore subject to Critical Thinking, an unreliable function of the ego. But while in some concordance with Zen in perhaps even excessively strict Empiricism, nevertheless Inductivism, unlike Zen, persists, nevertheless, Didactically in the culture of lasting progress of shared knowledge, where as Zen values only satori, the flash of transitory private intuition, a realization through direct experience.

in the ardent cultivation of immediacy and awakening to mindful heightened awareness of experience, and thence the rejection of conceptualization as burdensome self-conscious encumbrance and suffering, Zen quests for the complete abandonment of understanding as such.

Any central hypothesis to Zen seems to be more as to questions of priorities and life style, possibly in completion with any others including those, for example, prioritizing any form of scientific curiosity, love or material standard of living and physical comfort, let alone hedonism.
 

If a man is crossing the river and an empty boat collides with his skiff, even though he is a bad-tempered man he will not become very angry. But if he sees a man in the other boat he will scream and shout and curse at the man to steer clear. If you can empty your own boat crossing the river of the world, no one will oppose you, no one will seek to harm you. Thus is the perfect man - his boat is empty.

 

- Chuang-Tzu

Zen appears to be more of a competing value system or even taste, than a competing Epistemological Methodological and Ontological hypothesis. Indeed, Zen tends to define knowledge at all, by value according to it's importance as a frame of mind within Zen priorities thereof, despite any genial willingness of ancient and enduring Zen to embrace and to assimilate outside ideas and cultivate any superficial modernity in accordance with ideals of harmony via synthesis.

Zen isn't clever anymore!

"The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name. 
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth." 
-expounded Tao Te Ching

"You can't solve a problem on the same level you created it." admonished Albert Einstein. Indeed, in the words of Yamaoka Tesshu: "Zen is like soap. First you wash with it, and then you wash off the soap." In other words, the Zen value even of Zen itself, must needs be recognized as transitory, perhaps like unto whatever the state of the art in scientific knowledge and understanding.

But any however lasting scientific progress of civilization even amid transience and imperfection as extolled by Scientific Rationalism must be rejected as vanity by the Zen in quest only for the acceptance of Ecclesiastical futility. -Unless, indeed, the futility of futility itself, proverbially comes out in the metaphorical wash.

Indeed, whereas the serene Tao, dwelling far less in any appeal to the terrors of disorientation, almost conjures a ghostly form in it's explorations of the void as metaphor for the untroubled life and understanding, Zen, as the quest for emptiness amid enigma, may even resort to the surreal, non sequitur, enigma and contradiction, replete with nonsense and incongruous juxtapositions. 

For Zen may prize such paradox and contradiction, where in, by a sort of Existential Heisenberg Principle, the act of repeating the right answer, even to the extent of the Tao, makes it wrong again, even the mischief of sheer irrelevance. For to quote a sage neither partakes nor shares with or imparts to others, that bygone Zen flash of insight. A dilemma! 

And all such seems by far more recommendation than an admonition, as regards the metaphorical reinvention of the proverbial wheel. Indeed, the Eastern Philosophy of Zen thus rejects any such shared legacy as in Western style social progress in favor of a strange and lonely personal quest to meditate and clear the mind of thoughts, progressively purging and emptying all that is habitual, peripheral and extraneous, and to focus attention upon one inquiry oneself rather than by placing faith in the religious writings left behind by others.

For, unlike conventionally factitiously thematic religions and philosophies, it is claimed that there can be no such object or conceptualization in Zen upon which to affix thought. Indeed, in the ardent cultivation of immediacy and awakening to mindful heightened awareness of experience, and thence the rejection of conceptualization as burdensome self-conscious encumbrance and suffering, Zen quests for the complete abandonment of understanding as such.

Rather, the bottomless abyss of Zen is transcendentally noncommittal with nothing whatsoever to fathom. Indeed, unlike other brands of mysticism, erratic and apart from day to day life of the prosaic, only the systematic training of the mind by observation and deconditioning of the encumbered thought process itself back into an empty ordinary native condition, unperturbed, free and sufficient, a quiet, self-confident, and trustful existence of one's own, is ever of any much value to the Zen.

For to the mindful, by heightened awareness undistracted, the Zen is revealed in the most uninteresting practical commonplace and uneventful life of the plainest person, by simplicity and unencumbered open eyed recognition of living in the midst of life as it is lived, the greatest mystery that is actually already possessed by everybody, as it is daily and hourly performed; ever serene heart enlarged to embrace eternity of time and infinity of space in its every palpitation.

But if the no-mind is thought to perceive, thus does Zen assume perception free of self conscious preconception howsoever to be actually passive? After all, physiological sensation alone is not perception because perception is now known to be an active thought process even physiologically, neurologically, let alone psychologically, which must be learned over time by experience and practice. Hence any quest for unaltered perception is oxymoron and futile. And so, which such learning of perceptual habits are to be considered natural and wholesome as constituent to naive perception, and which are to be considered civilized and debased? And what preference can be anything but reflective and prejudicial no less?

Indeed, in so far perception is learned by trial and error, conjecturally, how much conjecture is possible without provoking reflection and self consciousness? Zen is a value preposition also prioritizing knowledge, rather than an Epistemology as such. Thus, in so far self consciousness and reflection play any part in perception, then perhaps if preconception cannot be eliminated without actually disabling perception, then conceivably self consciousness and reflection may still be deconditioned nevertheless. Or if not, then it's at least any hold of self consciousness and reflection upon affect even if not upon thinking. Or so may be claimed by the adepts.  

Indeed, with plethora of variations and syntheses, the two major schools of Zen are Rinzai, typically focusing on koan practice, and, in any departure therefrom, Soto stressing zazen meditation.

"Sit down and get glad!" is their motto. Zazen is body oriented and yogic, concerning itself with posture, breathing and patience. Hence, the zazen concept of doing nothing, not even thinking, pursuit of a void in which all potential choice of willful action resides, is put into practice by, instead of slouching or plopping down dead, sitting quietly in limber balance and readiness, poised as though about to rise. Some also practice a Zazen lying posture, especially when too sick for anything more, but otherwise proper sitting is said to demand more attention all too easily forgotten in the comfort of reclining. And the Judo equivalent is the neutral Mugamame stance, from which an easy transition to every offensive or defensive move most easily and readily flows.

With the practice and experience yielding the subtle cultivation of sensitivity, Zazen promotes certain attractive and healthful pleasurable sensations, along with the meditative free flow of transient thoughts and emotions, vanishing, it is said, as the drifting clouds passing to reveal the moon, for such likened is the observation of serenity.

• Be sure to permanently enable pop-ups from do-not-zzz.com in order to enjoy this charming interactive Flash presentation on the basic technique, experience and sensibility of Zen! 

And on the path of moderation, Siddhartha's famous middle way, relaxed and healthy posture may accrue. But from the extremes of time and dedication, comes numbness, even atrophy, hence effective escape not only from reason but embodiment, the rewards of blissful vegetation. For, indeed, Vipassana meditation claims to foster insight into physical sensation with sharper awareness, unconditioning all predisposition to favorable or unfavorable reaction at all into sheer indifference.

Whereas, the koans are often surreal paradoxes intended for meditation, typically a statement with an opposing corollary, to derail or simply exhaust linear thinking and aid in the attainment of satori. Koans, fables or questions as case study for contemplation, are like unto the Bodhidharma's unanswered "questions which tend not to edification." There is no answer because they are object lessons in the futility of all but the serenity of apathetic Zen emptiness. For, in the words of Huang-Po: "The ignorant eschew phenomena but not thought, the wise eschew thought but not phenomena."

And because Surrealism either seeks to disorient an audience unless they are slyly in on the gag, either way, Surrealism demands it's own blithe conviction, never overt superiority. Hence, the true relevance and impact of Surrealism is only undermined by vastly unfunny adolescent smug camp. And likewise with the Zen. 

So how may one ever respond to whatever the question to the satisfaction of the Zen master? With an answer just as meaningless, irrelevant non sequitur and surreal as the question. Or if all else fails, then perhaps by administration to the Zen master a long over due and well deserved beating himself!

Never so hard core in Relativism, and too common sensible as to actually deny Ontology, Zen, nevertheless, disdains any achievable clarity of intersubjectivity as failure, on grounds of purported dearth of inspiration. Hence, despite all Radicalist spirituality or Progressive Humanism, their remains in Zen the enduring temptation to Reactionary Ludditry, save by the restraint of moderation and common sense. And even then, the vaunted Zen synthesis of opposites may tend only to superficial modernity, admitting nothing uplifting in any progress save that of the private spirit.

Indeed, analysis is, literally, deconstruction. And even Gestalt, concerned with overall structure and network of relationship, still then works with parts to resynthesize the whole. But Zen Epistemology and practice insist only upon whole perception realizable only in the wonder of natural immediate experience as authentic and revelatory of innate self even if not otherwise certain as such.

• not-two  

In short, Zen Epistemology is Heraclitian. Indeed, understanding is a verb, an act, an event, arising as a transitory flash of inspiration, satori. But knowledge (especially of anything valued as profound by the Zen) as an enduring artifact that can be shared, much less built upon, is deemed a dubious proposition. And so Didacticism never obtains, neither experientially, Empirically and Phenomenologically, nor from First Principle even of self, even though all of that remains fundamental to Zen no less than to Didacticism. Thus, individual character development, growth, perhaps sagacity, even that ineffable Zen wisdom, is the best to be hoped for Methodologically.

Nihilism

Zen Nihilism so bleakly insists that the instant even to speak about anything, one is only doomed to miss the mark. Whereas, rational skeptical science and philosophy frankly lower any such impossible bar of perfection, spurning the futility of mythic unpremeditation, optimistically enacting any hope that the more we examine and discuss any phenomena, the closer thereby we may draw to experience the joy of better understanding thereof.

Psychiatrically, Nihilism even denotes Solipsism, and behaviorally, peculiar involvement and engagement in actually self defeating and counterproductive action. But then again, Anti-therapy or Therapeutic Nihilism is the disbelief in the efficacy or value of therapy! After all, a particular long standing criticism of Psychotherapy and Psychology, by Thomas Stephen Szasz most notably, is the assertion that we do not know why Psychotherapy works when it works, or why it fails when it fails.

In any case, while only few philosophers would actually claim to be Nihilists themselves, nevertheless the indifference of Nihilism is most often associated with Friedrich Nietzsche who argued that its corrosive effects would eventually destroy all moral, religious, and Metaphysical convictions and precipitate the greatest crisis in human history.

• Theo-crypto-Nihilism - Nihilism lurking behind the effort of faith...

In the 20th century, such Nihilistic themes as Epistemological failure, value destruction, and cosmic purposelessness, have preoccupied artists, social critics, and philosophers. Mid-century, for example, the Existentialists are said to have helped popularize tenets of Nihilism in their efforts to blunt its destructive potential. Surrealism followed. By the end of the century, Existential despair as a response to Nihilism increasingly gave way to an attitude of gloomy indifference often associated with Postmodern social Relativism and and depressing Literature.

Nihilism is constituted from the positions that because all thoughts and feelings are merely the deterministic effects of prior causality, all values, are all arbitrary unprovable unjustifiable nonsense (Existential pointlessness) and that nothing can be certain or knowable (Epistemological failure) or communicated (Wittgensteinean paralysis).

Nihilism is often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that actually condemns existence. Like unto the Zen, Nihilism spurns growth and progress learning from our mistakes.

A true Nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an indifferent impulse to destroy anything and everything. And such, indeed, is the thrust of Anarchistic political Nihilism holding that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake, independent of and even pessimistic towards any constructive program or possibility.

For Existential Nihilism means that because all thoughts and feelings are merely determined by prior causality, there is actually no willing choice. Therefore, even such cherished illusions of virtue as equality, pity and justice, are no more commendable or praiseworthy than wrath, malice or any other shortcoming or misdeed can be anyone's blame or responsibility.

Zen influenced Existential social Nihilism and detachment from everything, is manifest within the sense of isolation, futility, veritable well of sorrows and black hole of despair, angst and the hopelessness of existence increasingly prevalent in the modern world, all consistent with Nietzsche's prognosticated downward spiral.

Zen Nihilism standing in denial and value-destruction not only of material wellbeing, improvement of situation and circumstance and reactive happiness in response thereto, naturally engenders inward turning futility. Reactive happiness stands perhaps as no less than the prime target of alienated Nihilistic value-destruction against any enticement whatsoever howsoever of engagement within the external world at all.

The Zen, devaluing objective reality at all, perhaps even somewhat obsessively strives at complete subjective destruction, effective Phenomenal annihilation of ego and maya and thence liberation from their intrinsic fraudulence. And as with the Zen, some may even hold Nihilism as transitional to enlightenment emergent from the rubble, and personal liberation from the folly of the herd.

And such is precisely the precious hope at all for any progress in Philosophy which Nietzsche wrests from the bottom of the Pandora's box of Nihilism.

Zen Nihilism

Among the tenacious snares of the ego are every human emotional need and cherished illusion, including the yearning for sympathy and understanding. And such are the wellsprings of every intrinsic human bond or value. Hence, all regard, values and bonds derivative from emotional needs are, tautologically, values of attachment. Otherwise, there are values that are radically intellectualized, or values of detachment or of utmost pragmatism. And chief among these is the Nihilistic and Solipsistic Nirvana Principle, the strategy of overcoming this world, escaping distress by reducing one's needs, not only material but principally, all regard of emotion, ego, perception, transitory illusion, maya that is the snare of attachment, much as desire and pleasure are the trap of sin according to Christianity.

"Be content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are." wrote Lao Tzu "When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you."

But in the cutting prose of Kathleen Norris: "When you are unhappy, is there anything more maddening than to be told that you should be contented with your lot?"

Indeed, in like sentiment Jonathan Swift quips: "The stoical scheme of supplying our wants by lopping off our desires, is like cutting off our feet when we want shoes." 

Or to quote George Orwell, "The main motive for ''nonattachment'' is a desire to escape from the pain of living, and above all from love, which, sexual or non-sexual  is hard work." 

We all know how perversely people can actually wallow in their own misery! Indeed, paradoxically, in extreme cases, often many actually seek dangerous refuge in the depth of their own despair by simply giving up and effectively invalidating themselves. Such are typically inconsolable in their Nihilism, denying not only the reality, possibility or feasibility of happiness,, but the desire and very value.

And of course, there is no counter argument simply because needs, desires and hence values, are at best only reducible biologically, never logically, and hence, indeed arbitrary after all. Nevertheless, much as anyone might ever struggle to deny it, the very agony evidenced of such an individual in so wretched a condition only corroborates and affirms how greatly and deeply we all do care after all.

No indeed, all such harrowing misery certainly falls somewhere short of the indifferent serenity and joy in the moment ever extolled of Zen futility! So, is such a wallower in misery simply stranded foolishly somewhere on the harrowing path to enlightenment, or is Zen just unrealistic or simply unreasonable? And is invalidation perhaps the actual lie, rather than the ever despised maya?

"Happiness is fine as a side effect," opines Adam Phillips, British psychoanalyst and author of 'Going Sane' “It’s something you may or may not acquire, in terms of luck. But I think it’s a cruel demand. It may even be a covert form of sadism. Everyone feels themselves prone to feelings and desires and thoughts that disturb them. And we’re being persuaded that by acts of choice, we can dispense with these thoughts. It’s a version of fundamentalism."  Adding: "Read a positive-psychology book, and what would a happy person look like? He’d look like a Moonie. He’d be empty of idiosyncrasy and the difficult passions." Indeed: “It seems to me that if you were to take a rather stringent line here,” concludes Phillips, “then anyone who could maintain a state of happiness, given the state of the world, is living in a delusion.”

And of course, lest the point be missed, every such criticism as above of the rank self-dishonesty of bogus Power of Positive Thinking as ever may be redeployed and marshaled in quest of futility, however applies no less readily also to the discipline of Zen.

And on a personal note, I must confess, that for my own part, much as my heart may ever ache from the vicissitudes of life, yet, at least all things being equal, and being as I understand restless obsession or distress on the level of Freudian emotional inner conflict, I cannot say that my head hurts from mere thinking so that I'd actually ever yearn to quell or even slow down my very thoughts alone, however indirectly representational or abstract.

Of course, nevertheless, neither can I state from experience the benefit or not of such achievement or capability, for whatever the value or reliability of any such anecdotal evidence. But then, would one even remember?

After all, Chaung Tzu says that the true sage is absent-minded, forgetful of good and bad deeds alike.

Indeed, Zen tends to define knowledge at all, by value according to it's importance as a frame of mind within Zen priorities thereof, despite any genial willingness of ancient and enduring Zen to embrace and to assimilate outside ideas and cultivate any superficial modernity in accordance with ideals of harmony via synthesis.

Zen in a pill?

Yes: Doctors are now medicating unhappiness. Zen in a pill, better living through chemistry for a happy and better regulated brain! Or, is American fallacy simply heedless of Soviet experience?

Or then again, rather, is happiness a disorder?

Ancient and enduring Zen ever strives to embrace and to assimilate outside ideas and cultivate any superficial modernity in accordance with ideals of harmony via synthesis. However, if ancient Zen will never truly modernize, nevertheless, Zen may nonetheless, so to speak, find itself reborn in contemporary incarnation.

Indeed, Zen pragmatic Nihilism in dismissal of human needs and values as arbitrarily meaningless Ecclesiastical vanity, futility and the illusion of ego, reoccurs as bleeding-edge psychopharmacological neurochemical reductionism, palliative psychopharmacology questing after bio-happiness, in treatment of everything under the sun, including, and I quote: "the human condition" as nothing more than evolutionary maladaptation behind the times and civilization.

Yet exactly all such distressful evolutionary traits or response that are defensive may nevertheless be valued as useful even if aversive, rather than blithely pathologized as maladaptive.

So, how may be assessed the prospect of ongoing neurochemically assisted cessation and retreat from life?

In truth, life drug free demands responsibility at all for one's own safety and any cultivation whatsoever of self efficacy. Otherwise, narcotics, prescription or otherwise, really do become necessary to survival. And of course, leave us face it, at least given current state of the art, addiction rather might qualify as emotional baggage, a considerable and burdensome attachment.

Zen Nihilism Shock Therapy Vs. Zen Moderation

For 'Scientism' is the term coined by Karl Popper for what he saw as the religion of science, seeking certitude or whatever certitude surrogate therein, much as in religion likewise the appeal to faith. But what shall herein be dubbed as Scientism Lite, instead of actually expecting certitude or whatever certitude surrogate in science, nevertheless derives a satisfaction, even dependable reassurance and meaning in the deeper sense, in a word: solace, from hope in the rational and Empirical explainability of the universe embraced through science.

All such, however, remain intangible values. And, strictly speaking, the Ontology of science investigated via the Epistemological Methodology of scientific method and Empirical evidence, experiment and repeatable observation, is entirely empty of, all value judgment or attitudes, even motivating optimism of character towards scientific rationalism.

However, in the ardent cultivation of immediacy and  awakening to mindful heightened awareness of experience, and thence the rejection of conceptualization as burdensome self-conscious encumbrance and suffering, Zen quests for the complete abandonment of understanding as such that is, indeed, the goal of scientific investigation.

In the story, Katharine Janeway, redoubtable captain of the starship Voyager, lost in the reaches of uncharted deep space and ever burdened with command, must undergo a baffling and protracted ritual ordeal in order to safely traverse a dangerous and mysterious symbolic ceremonial archway or gateless gate in order to save her vulnerable dear friend and crewmate Kess from the consequences of her own unsuspecting curiosity and the puzzling injury resultant of a fateful accident at an alien temple cave where sensor readings are forbidden.

The rituals, however, are all confabulated from Janeway's own projected expectations, ambition and determination, all as so obliquely provoked by the oracular and obscure guidance so affably proffered her in the shrine.

And by the time Kess is saved and conscious once again, and the riddles both of the somewhat bizarre malady or injury and also of the rather paradoxical cure are finally open to rational scrutiny, Captain Janeway, harrowed, dazed and exhausted beyond caring, helpless throughout the baffling and seemingly arbitrary ordeal and desperate leap of faith, has attained enlightenment of Zen futility forever beyond the former solace of any Scientism Lite now quite crushed.

And so, in the end, though the efficacy of Science in rational Empirical inquiry reestablished as a matter of ordinary practicality, stands plausibly enough vindicated once again, nevertheless the enthusiastic technobable rings somewhat hollow forever more in Janeway's ears.

Hence and thus does the striking and deeper pent-up irrelevance exposed in the dénouement form the true climactic anticlimax of the tale. But the question must remain open if ever thence accrues any grace and more serine acceptance for Janeway of her situation.

For the question of meaning in the deeper sense, especially as in the proverbial meaning of life actually signifies whatever valued prospect of fulfillment or else only futility, sheer Ecclesiastical vanity. And in case of just such utter futility, then there is no use bemoaning thereof. Yet even so much as the aforesaid common sense may seem easier said than done, given actual human nature and behavior. And indeed, the embrace of apathy and surrender to futility is the primary motivating goal put forth of the Zen.

Life is suffering of one kind or another, and the sublime satori of stunned Zen apathy is requisite pain management. 

The program of becoming happy, which the pleasure principle imposes on us, cannot be fulfilled.

-Sigmund Freud:

 

Some say that one becomes addicted to shame when another's heart is closed to one, because, however excruciating, the sheer megalomania of taking the blame protects one from the ugly truth that we really have no control over others and the universe or God. We can't make either love us or, ultimately, even protect those who do. Put more simply, then, and in complete good faith, powerlessness, the impotent helplessness of the human condition is terminally demeaning.

Indeed, in this or any one life alone, let alone any others past or to come if such there be, all human suffering is seen in Zen as the emotional baggage of the ego; the ego, baggage and all, being an Ecclesiastical vanity that must, in a stunning cathartic moment of insight and confrontation with the truth of all such Ecclesiastical vanity in worldly things and attachments and desires, all regard whatsoever, be relinquished entirely, for the attainment liberation, Nirvana during this life, by which to overcome this world.

All cooperation in baffling and perplexing cult initiation persist upon suspended judgment and the hopes that things will begin to make sense later on. -A false hope to be dashed in Zen Surrealism. For Zen seeks to duplicate or simulate, less dangerously, an overwhelming effect sometimes observed of sudden devastating and even life threatening trauma, that of renewed vividness and shattered priorities, sometimes called: enlightenment.

Man can only endure a certain degree of unhappiness; what is beyond that either annihilates him or passes by him and leaves him apathetic. 

-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Indeed, the authoritarian peer pressure of traditional Japanese society engenders such crushing self consciousness that might even be metaphorically envisaged as a great rising bullying tsunami wave of shame and anguish such as might, at long last, in a moment of great and dramatic suspense, finally crest and crash at the threshold very sanity, redolent with the promise of well earned peace and gentle sunshine on that beach of the land beyond all cares!

But without fundamental catharsis or transformation one will be unable to advance, and only remain, metaphorically, asleep. Drastic measures, harsh regimen and great sacrifice may be indicated in order to be jolted from complacency and crack open to finally attain the serenity of blissful apathy.

And so, the Zen Master provokes or evokes the disciple's distress, by sympathy or cruelty, sense or nonsense, by any means fair or foul that the Zen Master may choose in whatever opening as may ever present itself, until nothing makes sense, and so nothing matters any more. Because the painful Existential conundrums of life, none the least of which surround Zen itself, investigated by uncompromising Zen must stick in one's craw, impossible neither to stomach nor to expel. And freedom from Mammon and Maya must be attained by passage through the barrier (for such is the role of the Zen Master) and not the gateless gate. 

By paradoxical intention, never striving or exhorting to motivate disciples, but actually struggling to drive them away, thus does the Zen Master leave it, instead, to the disciples to try to motivate the Zen Master himself, thus perhaps allowing the disciples the latitude for developing a sense of responsibility for their own wishes, be that a minimal, moderate, realistic and healthy self accountability, or else an impossible transcendent ideal of responsibility engendering or revealing desperate sycophancy.

Thus, whereas the professional compassion of the basically Freudian talking cure of traditional Western Psychotherapy coaxes out Catharsis from the patient via acceptance and even affirmation of the values of human needs, actually striving to heal whatever damage to self image, by contrast, Zen seeks to liberate inner Buddha nature finally by crushing the ego shell which is seen as the root of all suffering, fear and doubt, according to Buddhism and Hinduism the motivating goal put forth  of which is to need less and cease caring so as to finally embrace not simply any Western value of ingenuity and creative problem solving born of frustration, but the great truth of Ecclesiastical vanity, sheer futility.

And they're not kidding!

For as long as the world abides in tragedy, mad and damaging, madness of some kind or other will have it's plausible defenders as the only true sanity and succor.

Hence, Zen is Draconian pragmatism in the service of optimistic Nihilism.

Indeed, manipulation is best defined as undue advantage from trickery via the exploitation of affective innate and conditioned triggers or "push buttons" to undermine and overwhelm, even barrage, resistance, better judgment and autonomy of the target, via subtext of emotional incentive and disincentive. –As distinct from open coercion alone or substantive disinformation, lies. Typically, the manipulator obfuscates the nature of their coercion exercised, along with whatever self-serving advantage thereof. And for the Zen, life amounts no more that to an endless and wearisome succession of manipulation, via the diabolical "push button" triggers and strings attached, escapable only by surrendering all attachment without regard. Whereas, for example, Transactional Analysis, by contrast, is less radical and more selective, and may even be found appealing to Zen moderation.

So, if anything in life does deserve to be accorded any greater importance or legitimacy, then what is essential and what is extraneous? And essential or extraneous to what purpose, motivating goal put forth, agenda or value? Unless relative to any clear and discrete purpose or strategy, assertion or implication of the primacy of one aspect of human nature, Phenomenal condition or state of consciousness over another is surely more often the very height of value judgment, not objectivity and Ontology of reality per se. And, indeed, the ancient and ongoing debate to this very day, is one over not only purposeful strategy but very much of value preference. Even the Zen rejection of values is in and of itself an ultimately pragmatic value. And madness of any stripe is perhaps more often marked by the lack or distortion of values than by any other more concrete delusion. Hence, arguably, values, then, are inherent to perspective and hence indispensable to clarity and sense, no less than reason itself. Yet the greatest sense of clarity often belongs only to madness, exactly as advertised by the Zen.

Because, whereas in Western Psychology, the break from involvement in external reality leaves only desperate lonely Narcissism, in mystical traditions such as the Zen, only a fully realized psychosis facilitated in Zen practice, achieving the lofty abandonment of worldliness, is the only path to restore genuine spontaneity, clarity and compassion, by freedom from suffering.

Little doubt can there be that there is no despair save by even the last fading embers of hope. And with the abandon of all hope, most beguiling and mesmerizing of all motivating snares of illusion, so too, obviously, will despair be quelled at long last, and peace attained. And such exactly is the radically pragmatic and advice of the Zen, indeed, the Socratic next best thing to being dead.

The ever begged value question remains, however, in that another somewhat less flattering euphemism than the perhaps somewhat cavalier lofty and romantic metaphor of crushing the ego shell, and no less value loaded, is in the tragic pathos of the expressive figure: to break one's spirit. -Indeed, surely a high cost and a grave risk for contentment, such as ever may accrue thereby, from the literal abandon of all hope! In Psychiatry, after all, futility and loss of interest are considered signs of disordered depression, not revered as the royal road to enlightened serenity.

Boredom: the desire for desires. 

-Leo Nikoleyevich Tolstoy, 'Anna Karenina'

 

And ironically, perhaps whatever famous achievements of Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, where necessarily contingent upon exactly the sheltered posh life that he came to reject as such a sham. Indeed, whereas perhaps the closest Western analog of the Eastern concept of satori, namely Mazlow's famous model of self-actualization, abiding or episodic, very much depends upon social and technological progress towards the very highest standard of living and comfort, explicitly making prerequisite any experience of the satisfaction and satiation of worldly physical, emotional and social needs of deficiency, rather than at all, transcendence thereof via their abnegation, suppression, reduction and elimination in accordance with Nirvana Principle, and even though any such Western Psychopathological characterization as Psychotic break may seem harshly prejudicial in connotation, it may rather even be just such stunned apathetic detachment, in turn exalted as true inspiration into long denied dawning grasp and acceptance of overwhelming reality, the awakening that is the specifically Zen Catharsis pain management, suffering unto burnout ad apathy at the natural safeguard tolerance threshold of Ecclesiastical vanity, sheer futility, all cold comfort as such may offer, thence enlightenment, attainment of the Socratic "next best thing to death," a perfect neutral balance and harmony, inner peace, awakened undistracted mindful heightened awareness of the momentary and common place, awakening to freedom and true autonomy that will be extolled as the path to perfect selfless compassion, sharper wits even from perfected detached rationality (though never exactly Rationalism per se), or even better Tantric sex, depending upon who one asks. After all, according to the Zen, even without the sheer Nordic sense of darkness and menace of an Odin the Mysterious Stranger, nevertheless, the Buddha performs not only as Psyche Pomp and guide but scam artist trickster! For, to find oneself, one first must loose oneself.

And, there fore, all this dissertation is useless. Because in Zen, explanation actually undermines demonstration of Zen enigma. Only the harrowing experience may be beneficial. For the essence of Zen is Ecclesiastical vanity, sheer futility! -Ecclesiastical vanity. Thus, it must be presumed that if any of this is utterly confusing or, perhaps better still, emotionally unimaginable, then understanding may dawn!

Or, else, perhaps, also if the information rich juxtapositions may be pleasing, even despite being coherently and logically sequenced, and not because of it.

Although, in the words of Yamaoka Tesshu: "Zen is like soap. First you wash with it, and then you wash off the soap." And to that latter very end of sobering letdown, Didactics of critical demystification may yet find paradoxically Zen application.

Indeed, even the traditional Zen scorn towards Philosophy typically rife with contradictions and also conundrums such as in this very sentence, is, in and of itself, nevertheless, a crucial Philosophical position. Much as Zen embraces the void by process of elimination ad infinitum, likewise the Socratic Method strives for enlightenment by refutation, also questing for truth in a process of elimination. So why does Zen tradition, so prizing of paradox, spurn the contradictions discovered in philosophical discourse?

At any rate, the prized karmic misanthropy of Zen is lofty and paradoxical. Indeed, perhaps even the most exploitative liars and frauds do God's work in crushing ego. For the sincere tough love of Zen is not intended as any sort of demonic and heartless Sadistic gloat, but, rather, just to the contrary, a sacred quest into the heart of the tragic human condition that is the rightful object of causeless perfect compassion.

Zen claims to offer nothing that isn't there for the taking. And yet, Zen is supremely difficult and troubling. If Zen ever patronizes, then even such a position might even proceed from integrity and consistency. And so, hypocrisy is seen only entering from human weakness thwarting true ideal Zen, to gullible decuples and their arrogant Zen celebrities. And so, is any of that indication of the radical utopian overreach of Zen?

In confrontation with this very question, what will be the demands of Zen moderation and controversy? 

Comedian and host of the Daily Show, Jon Stewart, lamenting the polarization of politics by extremists, and yearning for the better centered and generally less excitable masses to rise and storm the seats of power, assailing the clashing ideologues, chanting: "be reasonable! Be reasonable" also likewise has suggested a qualified pledge of allegiance "one nation under our reasonable God."

But is such ever to be Zenned? And in which heaven abide reasonable gods?

Wise men make proverbs and fools repeat them. -as the old saying goes...

Indeed, if even the Lord Krishna to Arjuna cautioned how he could never tell his story, as it slipped from him, the same way twice, then what did Gautama Siddhartha really discover, and nearly never expound at all, convinced that no contemporary could possibly understand?

Indeed, can whatever distortion of ages past ever be pierced, even today? Can the Zen mischief of repetition only yet compound and confound upon itself? Or in all this time, might we dare be optimistic ever of better readiness to receive and understand?

Perhaps the clue may yet be had in that which does not reconcile, not even as dualistic opposition. Namely, moderation, the famed middle way of Gautama Siddhartha the Buddha on the one hand, with a motivating goal put forth of perfect release or escape on the other, necessitating, instead, such jarringly immoderate Draconian self negation, crushing of the ego shell (meaning: breaking the spirit) and surrender of all attachment and regard in the abandon of all hope.

For Zen engages in the denunciation of human sympathy as a deadly attachment ensnaring the unwary from attainment of Zen futility and emptiness awakening into mindful heightened awareness of the transitory and common place. Indeed, Zen extols dissolution of the bonds of society, all because of suffering in society. Zen is Philistine and anti-intellectual because of the risk of disconnection entailed in the employ of layered abstract reasoning.

Indeed, what oversimplification can there be the worse and falling further from the mark in any hoped for apprehension of the totality of being, than perhaps among the greatest of immoderation nigh inherent to the Zen even abandoning perfectionism in practice, nevertheless enduring in the fanatical Radicalist insistence upon pure Cartesian justification for every cognition or affect whatsoever!

And, surely, what a fuckin' drag! For to quote Thomas Moore:" But, faith, fanatic faith, once wedded fast to some dear falsehood, hugs it to the last." 

Rather, deconditioning of mind and body, like anything else, will generally be more fruitful in harm reduction, progress, improvement, systematically correcting errors and deficiencies, traumatic or otherwise (-and ideology, especially!), as they come to light, than so immoderately clinging to, and thereby turning truth into, the dire falsehood of exhorting wholesale attack upon whatever will howsoever be simplistically and enthusiastically denounced as the ultimate root of all our suffering, whether as ever the case may be, the demon the hour be attachment as in Zen, desire as in traditional Christianity, property as in Marxism, or any other woefully half-baked target.

By contrast to Zen extremism, the motivating goal put forth  of Sigmund Freud was far more modest, the transformation of the extreme emotional misery that he witnessed constantly, just as he often said, into ordinary unhappiness. For surely such must be the first step to anything at all grander. Perhaps, likewise, Gautama Siddhartha, who rejected extremes both of excess and of deprivation, was not such an ideal perfectionist at all, and only sought, more reasonably, to address such suffering as he discovered out in the real world, only via sensible harm reduction, improving life tolerably by common sense healthy living, mind and body. -Indeed, the optimism of progress, imperfect, open transparent reasonable and fallible ongoing improvement, being a position frequently misunderstood, nay, if not quite entirely incomprehensible, from any all-or-nothing transcendental ideology doggedly insistent upon the perfect ideal as the only true measure of all situations for anything to be knowable at all.

Perhaps the idealists deserve praise for any vision of anything however impossibly better even amid the most crushing conditions of the ancient world and endless human suffering. nevertheless, such may yet profit from a gentle reminder how even the fire-bringer and redeemer Prometheus sacrificed all only to however improve the hitherto damp, cold and dismal human condition, however incrementally.

Another definition or hypothesis of the middle way of Siddhartha, consistent and reconciled with Zen idealism, is again, of neutrality and hence void, returning to the putative great redeeming truth of Ecclesiastical vanity, sheer futility, awakened totality and sheer serene apathy free of distraction from mindful heightened awareness of the ordinary and transitory. Nevertheless, is the latter rationalization actually reconcilable and consistent with Zen moderation? Indeed, can the middle way metaphor expand to encompass both latter and former definitions as aspects in Gestalt synthesis?

For the manifest immoderation and human perversity to be explained away, remains so manifest in all of the melodrama of uncompromising Zen rectitude and cathartic breakdown, perhaps only long overdue for a big Zenslap or just a gentle smile, from some latter-day avatar or inner specter of serene and clean living Siddhartha.

For in calmer alternative to the Zen foment of inner crisis, however, there remains the seemingly safer, gentle, simple and moderate recommendation of the mind with no reference point in meditation toward the quiet cultivation of Zen inner peace, void, indeed, fruit of the very same great redeeming value of totality awakened in mindful heightened awareness of the ordinary and transitory, sheer Ecclesiastical futility and serenely apathetic surrender of all attachment without regard, and most especially the goodbye to agitated worry, especially lunatic ideology.

• Ultimate loneliness and enlightenment

What is "Not-Doing?"

You can observe a lot just by watching."

-Yogi Berra

 

 

Descartes seized upon, as the beginning of his philosophy, his famous declaration: "I think, therefore I exist." But if you are not thinking, what? This is where Zen begins.

 

Zen means doing things willingly and cheerfully, and not-doing means letting actions control the doer rather than the other way around.

 

So, can there be any Zen of effortless Altruism? Indeed, what numinous clarity of right action transcends any dichotomy of selfishness versus Altruism?

Even in the stillness of sitting meditation, Not-Doing needs must remain distinct from mere inertia, laziness, sloth, laissez-faire or, indeed, any mere passivity, but perhaps more properly, action in disregard, without attachment. The point being that apprehension is often known even to bring about the very dreaded results. Don't force it, just let be.

By the sense of relief from pressure of Not-Doing one may gain the freedom and sense of relief to simply be (or Not-Be) oneself. In equilibration, free of the striving and preoccupation of intention, the bliss of ever unfolding oneness may reveal itself to the quieted mind.

Wu-Wei is the Taoist expression for the power of positive not-doing. It is the action in non-action, the knowing in not-knowing, the something in nothing, the doing in not-doing. Wu-Wei is following the way of the water, the way of the wind. It is the not absence of action, but it is the absence of trying. Wind is never still, but it has no intention. Water ever seeks its own level, but not on purpose.

 

Or in the words of Chuang Tzu: "detachment, forgetfulness of results, and abandonment of all hope of profit."

Not-Doing defined as action from Buddha Nature, however, only shifts the question. And Buddha Nature as opposed to what else? Why, ego, of course. So, Not-Doing, not by explanation or conceptualization, but as the fruit of practice of Zen just as any other system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities, denotes automatic skill, easy effortless action ingrained to second nature without even trying, from No-Mind, fearless and free of all cares, empty of thought and without self conscious premeditation nor by impulse either.

The arrow is said to fall from the Zen archer like the first snowflake, with salvation from sin, escape from karma and no weight of responsibility on his own part as he acts without attachment or regard, without the ugliness of thinking about it.

As a glittering generality, mythical promise of the miraculous is epitomized in the immortally trite platitude of Yoda the Jedi Master: "Do or do not, there is no try." 

Likewise, skilled dharma is thought to accrue in Not-Doing, supremely adaptive and unpremeditated right action going with the flow and rising to situation unfolding, behavior that arises from a sense of connection to others and to one's environment and the experience of unity, for everything to take care of itself, including morality, all too easily dismissed with all other passions, emotional attachments, regard or conceptual and rational issues.

For the problem with any Nihilistically unsympathetic morally void Zen, is that, just as the saying goes, nature abhors a vacuum. And such a Zen readily adapts itself to whatever authoritarian ethos and duty of obedience that history brings, however deranged. So, what, precisely, ever distinguishes masterful adaptability from pliant resignation or even sheer murderously violent psychotic disassociate states of fanatical marauders? Indeed, is not the hottest circle of Dante's Inferno reserved for those who cultivate neutrality during moral crisis? Because by standing in the face of suffering can never be harmless!

But in the alternative to simply going with the flow, there is still also the Zen that prizes the honesty of agitation and intractable discomfort with Existential dilemma. But even such might simply never be enough: 

Action may not always bring happiness, but there is no happiness without action.
—Benjamin Disraeli
 

• Zen and the Art of Divebombing
  or: The Dark Side of the Tao
• An otherwise fairly accurate even if dogmatically Trinitarian Critique of Zen

Zen brainwash?

All cooperation in baffling and perplexing cult initiation persist upon suspended judgment and the hopes that things will begin to make sense later on. -A futile hope to be dashed in Zen Surrealism. All other revelation is deemed fraudulent.

Zen is the paradoxical cultivation of non-cultivation and striving to non-striving, for a return to a romanticized natural state which will be empty of artifice, prior conditioning, premeditation and premediation whatsoever, and release from all thereof, in recognition that only the illusion of non-enlightenment, ego, self consciousness born of inner reflection brought about by life in society, all trivialized and demonized and thought to obscure becoming enlightened naturally.

And ever the role of propaganda is to lighten conscience in savagery against whatever is demonized or trivialized in the first place. And from whatever core values, typical cult conditioning reinforces the pivotal rationalizations of a shared world view rarified of empathic common sense. But in the struggle against abu