Descarte's and Zen
Descartes’s Path of Enlightenment: Why Nothingness Implies the Existence of Something
Emptiness is not the same as nothingness. Descartes believes that one cannot derive something from nothing without being repugnant. However, if one is to understand the foundations of their existence, being repugnant may be one way to gain this knowledge. In his Discourse on the Method, Descartes outlines his road to Enlightenment. However, Descartes accepts that his path is not one that everyone should walk. In the same sense, Zen scriptures seek not to give Enlightenment but to show a Method. Both Mahayana Buddhism and Descartes believe reading and writing cannot instill Enlightenment. Enlightenment cannot be obtained through senses, for they cannot be trusted. Meditation paves the path of awakening. For Descartes and Zen, the difference lies in the Method. Descartes’ meditation is used for the mind, whereas Zen Buddhists use meditation to let go of the mind.
Keywords: Enlightenment is to know. Zen means to meditate, but action defines the true meaning of Zen. Nirvana translates as the continual process of letting go. Bodhisattva is one who reaches the precipice of Nirvana but turns back to share their compassion with the world. Samsara is the cycle of reincarnation in the wheel of life and death.
Introduction to Descartes’ Fourth Meditation
Descartes’ perception of God is that which is more than the human soul. In the first meditation of the Discourse on the Method, Descartes observes his first principle: “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes is unable to think without the realization of Self. In this sense, Self means our human reasoning within our inward eye. Descartes could only explain his first principle as authentic if there were a higher power since there were things outside his understanding that only a being more than him could understand. Descartes thought obtaining knowledge from nothingness was impossible and repugnant. To Descartes, nothingness cannot derive from God because defects cannot create the ultimate perfection. The foundation of his epistemology is God and the idea that God is the one who is beyond the human soul so that which is inexplicable can be explained through God.
Introduction to Zen
Zen is the path that thrusts all aside and moves directly to its goal. Alan Watts, the author of The Spirit of Zen, explains that “Zen is a vigorous attempt to come into direct contact with the truth itself.” The truth in Zen is understanding how connected Seeing that you are in a cycle of life and death is where the idea of reincarnation comes from. Zen is the understanding that the ordinary person is a Buddha. When they ask why they do not feel it to be accurate, the response from a Zen Master is, “Why do you ask the question?”. “Zen was to jolt people out of their intellectual ruts and their conventional morality.” It did this by posing impossible questions, making a joke out of metaphysics, thus turning orthodox philosophy upside down. Descartes thought that meditation is the process of actively thinking over problems and coming to an understanding on his terms. He finds truth within himself and what he knows.
Zen Buddhists perform Zazen, which is the action of nonthinking, letting go of your thoughts and senses and not focusing on any one thing but instead allowing it to come to you. The example given is that of a good driver. They are one with the car and therefore do not need to think to drive well. Using Zazen, one does not reflect or sleep but is one with the Buddha-Nature. In this, we find the ability to answer Koans, which are Japanese paradoxes given to us by Zen Masters. These Koans can only be solved by meditating and focusing not on the question but rather living with the Tao. Descartes explains, “I had learned to think of something more perfect than myself.” Where Descartes believes God is the perfectness beyond the human soul, Zen describes it as the Tao. “You cannot say something specific about everything.”
I think that Descartes is a genuinely profound philosopher ahead of his time. Descartes understands that reading a book or words spoken is shallow. They can not be defined as truth because one’s truth stems from within. The understanding of different people and cultures are correct; they are silly different paths to the same place. We are all headed towards a path to heaven. We are stuck in this never-ending loop of Samsara, and Descartes built methods and understandings that got him close to the Enlightenment. I also believe he is not wrong when describing God as the pillar of his imperfect soul. Zen Buddhism goes one step further and says that it is not God but the Buddha-nature that cannot be seen, felt, or understood but is all around us and in all of us. Where Descartes falls short is his attachment to the idea of a God. Alan Watts said in his lecture A Finger Pointing at the Moon: “The idea of God is a finger pointing at God… Most people, instead of following the finger, suck it for comfort”. This encompasses my whole issue with Descartes’s Meditations, for It feels like instead of following with the water of the world, Descartes is trying to go against it.
Ultimately, if one does not realize they are part of everything, they will think everything around them is nothingness. However, the world is not nothing; it is empty of things, but it is full of the Tao, and you have a duty as a Bodhisattva to spread Dharma and provide Nirvana to everyone. Emptiness is not the same as nothingness. Descartes believes that you cannot derive something from nothing without being immoral. However, if one is to understand the foundations of their existence, being repugnant may be one way to gain this knowledge. In his Discourse on the Method, Descartes outlines his road to Enlightenment, but this path is meant for only some. In the same sense, Mahayana Buddhism scriptures seek not to give Enlightenment but to show one Method to obtain spiritual freedom. Both Mahayana Buddhism and Descartes believe that you cannot read into Enlightenment; the truth cannot be obtained through one’s senses, for they cannot be trusted. The path of awakening is paved by action; the difference lies in the approach. Descartes’ meditation is used for a reason, whereas the Zen Buddhist meditation is used to let go of reason.
In conclusion, it is not repugnant to derive something from nothing because to have the notion of nothingness, one must have something to compare it to. In the same way, philosophers cannot have beliefs without having someone opposing them. We need our opposites to provide balance to our world. Descartes’ Discourse on the Method provided many insights into his reason, and it is not my place to say that Descartes was not Enlightened, for every path will lead there. Zen Buddhism is the path with the least resistance because they go with it instead of against the water, like Descartes.