Many Westerners have been attracted to Zen because they are looking for some coherent spiritual system by which to live, but for any number of reasons they have been alienated by Western religion, if not to religion as a whole. These individuals rather consistently state that Zen is a philosophy not a religion. This view has been encouraged by the writings of such prominent Western authors as Alan Watts, but also by Asian authors such as D.T. Suzuki and Sohaku Ogata. For example, in the Ogata’s book Zen for the West the author says that since Zen is not based on the idea of holiness, which he claims implies pantheism, polytheism or monotheism, Zen can not be a religion. This suggests that Zen is just a non-religious philosophy. But is this a true reflection of Zen or is it a catering to the anti-religious attitudes of Western readership? Of course, with some embarrassment later in his book Ogata acknowledges that there are images in Zen temples and that Zen monks pray. He says that this may seem strange to some since this is what is done in theistic religions.

The question of whether Zen is a religion or a philosophy is entirely a Western one. Religion and philosophy have never been viewed as separate subjects in the East as they have in the West. Philosophy as an independent phenomenon had its origins in ancient Greece. There philosophy was developed as an attempt to explain the world both rationally and independently of Greek religion which was found to be logically inadequate at explaining the world. All Eastern philosophy arose directly out of religion and was viewed more as a supplement to it than as something in contrast or opposition to it.

There is no doubt that there is a philosophy of Zen, but this is a religious philosophy. This philosophy consists of those elements of Zen that support its claim to teach a truth that will give religious meaning to its followers. These elements are that: (I) the truth is found more by focusing within oneself than in doctrinal writings. (II) The past and future are far less real than the present which alone should be lived in fully. (III) There is a relative and absolute reality. Relative reality gives all the appearance of being pluralistic or dualistic. The absolute reality is non-dual. This means that the so-called sacred (a distinctly religious concept) and the profane of reality are identical.

A profound understanding or internalization of all of the above will lead to an experience of great peace and an even greater sense of the unconditional worthiness of self, others and the world. This peace and sense of worthiness is called enlightenment (Satori). These philosophical elements provide the minimum requirements for those who view Zen as either just a religion or just a philosophy. If all that a person needs is to simply intellectually acknowledge these elements this is fine; but this Minimal or Philosophical Zen alone does not seem to be what attracts most Westerners to Zen.

It has been my experience that what attracts most Westerners to Zen is the hope of attaining enlightenment. This is where the anti-religious attitude becomes problematic. There are certain forms of enlightenment that are exclusively intellectual but Zen Satori is not a part of them. Satori, besides being grounded in the previously mentioned elements, more specifically means that there is no fundamental difference between the most defiled person and the Buddha. This is because everyone has identical unconditionally worthy Buddha-nature. This may not seem to be an illogical concept until it is translated into such an absolutely concrete statement as someone who brutally murders an innocent child is as worthy of being a Buddha (though in jail) as is the noblest of saints. It is at this point that our dual and logical thinking begins to revolt since dual thinking finds this statement not only morally offensive, but also intellectually absurd. Yet, if we can not accept this absurdity then we can not hope to experience satori.

Once we do accept this absurdity we can accept the even more liberating absurdity that there is no duality between life and death. Thus there is no reason to fear death. Philosophy can give meaning to life and even to death, but only in the abstract. To say that all people must sooner or later die is an abstract statement and can be accepted with a minimum of emotional distress. However, to say that I must die is not only an absolutely concrete statement, but is the most emotionally loaded one of my existence. Most human beings have never been able to accept their own death with logical objectivity. The very survival of religion in an age of science proves this. In Zen the allowing of us to experience that our lives are unconditionally worthy of Buddhahood gives us unconditional value or meaning, and such lives can not be devalued or made meaningless by death. Thus satori permits us to face death with perfect equanimity.

To experience the non-duality of the sacred and the profane, the saint and the sinner, life and death, therefore, requires us to leave behind doubt and its child, philosophy, for faith and its child, religion. As long as anyone is completely open to a logical challenge to (doubt about) the Zen teachings on non-duality that person can consider his or her commitment to Zen as strictly philosophical and the benefits from it as limited. However, the moment that person rejects any logical challenge to that non-duality by declaring these teachings to simply be true he or she has become a religious person or person of faith. This faith is what takes us to the threshold of satori.

Just because one must have religious faith in order to access satori, however, does not mean one has to buy completely into Zen as Standard Buddhist Zen. What I mean by Standard Buddhist Zen is Zen that more or less acknowledges standard Buddhist supernaturalism. Such Zen accepts the reality of celestial Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, metaphysical Karma and rebirth, and even some belief in psychic powers. None of this is a necessary part of the religious faith required to attain satori. Instead, the most one has to subscribe to is the Non-theistic or Minimally Religious Zen. This is a form of Non-theistic Religious Humanism in that it rejects any belief in divine or supernatural assistance. At the same time this Zen acknowledges that there is a level of reality that is beyond, or deeper than, that which can be comprehended by reason or logical thinking alone. This non-logical element is an essential ingredient to human fulfillment. In other words, it says that mankind needs "faith" in something more than human rationality. To a Zen practitioner this is none other than faith in the unconditional worth or sacredness of oneself, others, and the world here and now.

Return Home