Originally posted by DeepThought
I wonder if that's a feature of spirituality generally, that it can't be reduced to a string of symbols?
Zen points to the reality that is prior to our conceptualizations. When Zen uses language, it has to be understood in that sense. Zen
koans, while not being direct pointing, are aimed at deconstructing the habitual conceptualization—the conceptual lenses through which we tend to “see” reality, always colored by those lenses.
Note: Because of linguistic differences from western languages, Zen tends to be based on a reality theory of truth, rather than a correspondence theory of truth. That is, truth just
is the naked real, before conceptualization. There’s no need to set one theory against another, only to understand the differences in expression.
An introductory text on Zen? Like LJ, I have some difficulty. (The Batchelor book he mentioned is an excellent text, though, on Mahayana Buddhist thought generally.) Do you want
Zen? Or somebody’s conceptualization of Zen? If the latter, I might suggest Shunryu Suzuki’s
Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind (with the understanding that it is explicitly based on a particular school of Zen: Soto). Or,
Dropping Ashes on the Buddha, which represents a Korean Zen (Song) perspective[/i]. Or, perhaps,
Waking Up in the Present, translated by Thomas Cleary.
These all take some work, though they are not complex in the scholarly sense. They might awaken you.
For a “middle ground” work, maybe Alan Watts’
The Spirit of Zen.
Be well.