8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

1/57

TOTAL KENOSIS,TRUE SHUNYATA,

and

THE PLEROTIC SELFof

THOMAS MERTONand

ABE MASAO

JOE LENCIONI

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

2/57

...we are invited to forget ourselves on purpose, cast our awful solemnity

to the winds and join in the general dance.

-Thomas Merton, New Seeds of Contemplation

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

3/57

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1

CHAPTER 1: THOMAS MERTON AND THE SELF ...............................................8

MERTONS INFLUENCES ........................................................................................................................ 8

IMPORTANCE OF THE SELF .................................................................................................................. 11

MERTONS SELF ................................................................................................................................. 13

False Self ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. .... 13

Self-identity............................................................................................................................................. 14

Self-will................................................................................................................................................... 16

Arising of the False Self ........................................................................................................................... 17

True Self........................................................................................................................................ 19

Body and Soul.......................................................................................................................................... 22Poverty .................................................................................................................................................... 23

Finding the True Self................................................................................................................................ 25

CHAPTER 2: ABE MASAO AND THE SELF..........................................................28

ABES INFLUENCES ............................................................................................................................. 28

IMPORTANCE OF THE SELF .................................................................................................................. 30

ABES SELF ........................................................................................................................................ 32

Nihilism Beyond Religion ...... ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 32

The Self............ ............ ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ......... 35

Self-Centeredness..................................................................................................................................... 36

True Self.................................................................................................................................................. 37

Kenosis............................................................................................................................................... 37

Shunyata ............................................................................................................................................. 40

CHAPTER 3: MERTON AND ABE IN DIALOGUE ............................................... 44

FUNCTION OF THE SELF....................................................................................................................... 44

TOTAL KENOSIS AND TRUE SHUNYATA................................................................................................ 48

PLEROTIC SELF................................................................................................................................... 49

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................52

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

4/57

1

INTRODUCTION

Poet, artist, writer, Trappist monk, and mystic, Thomas Merton was born in 1915

in France and died in Bangkok, Thailand in 1968 of accidental electrocution at the age of

53. Although he was neither a philosopher nor a theologian, Merton left a large body of

writing about such topics as contemplation, holiness, Zen, and mysticism. He

communicated with eastern thinkers and in 1968 visited Asia despite being a

contemplative monk in a Trappist monastery. Clearly, Merton was a prolific writer who

broke free of convention in his daily life. This is what first interested me in him Merton

seemed to be a rare kind of person who uniquely combined Buddhist thought and practice

with Catholicism.

Merton had a unique perspective on life that, while remaining rooted in

Catholicism, incorporated ideas native to eastern traditions.1 Various Catholic thinkers in

the past had similarly expressed their faith in an almost Zen-like way, but Thomas

Merton did so during a period of rapid economic, cultural, and religious transition, and

has been called a modern prophetic religious writer.2

Through his turn toward the East,

Mertons inquisitive mind developed an even greater cultural and spiritual sensibility.

Another fascinating modern group of thinkers is the Kyoto School of Philosophy,

comprised of, among other Buddhist philosophers such as Abe Masao (b. 1915), three

central figures: Nishida Kitar (1870-1945), Tanabe Hajime (1885-1962), and Nishitani

Keiji (1900-1990).3

Catholic theologian, James W. Heisig, who is Professor and

Permanent Research Fellow at Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture in Nyoga,

1Chalmers MacCormick, Zen Catholicism of Thomas Merton, 802.

2 Paul Bernadicou, The Eastward Turn of Thomas Merton, 352.3 James W. Heisig, Philosophers of Nothingness, 3-5.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

5/57

2

Japan, refers to the Kyoto school as Japans first sustained and original contribution to

western philosophical thought from a distinctively eastern perspective.4

Of the

schools thinkers, Abe Masao has been called a leading figure in the Buddhist-Christian

dialogue who is attempting to work out of both camps.5

Therefore, Kyoto Philosophy

was, in some respects, a bridge from eastern thinking to western philosophy.

Additionally, according to the web site for the Thomas Merton Center, Merton

had corresponded with Keiji Nishitani, D.T. Suzuki, Abe Masao, whom he quotes in his

Asian Journal, and other Zen scholars.6

Perhaps Merton recognized something in the

Kyoto Philosophy that called to him in his quest for bringing the East to the West.

Comparing the two is important because they both have pushed the limits of their

respective traditions while representing the depth of their respective traditions. Therefore,

this is a comparison of segments of Christianity and Buddhism that are useful for

comparing with the rest of their respective traditions. Ultimately, this helps one learn

about and relate to others, breaking down the barriers of otherness caused by fear and

hatred. Furthermore, it elucidates a basis for recognizing commonalities in praxis that

promotes not just a tolerance but an embracing of other traditions and cultures as

exemplified in the ideal practitioners of these traditions. Unfortunately, despite their

apparent similarity in functionbridging the East and the WestThomas Merton and

the Kyoto thinkers rarely communicated with each other. Furthermore, Merton has not

frequently cited the Kyoto thinkers in his writing and few scholars have compared

4Ibid., 3.

5Stephen Morris, Buddhism and Christianity: The Common Ground, 89.

6The Thomas Merton Center is the official repository of Mertons manuscripts, letters, journals, tapes,

drawings, photographs, and memorabilia located at Bellarmine University in Kentucky. Thomas Merton,

The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton, 17 Thomas Merton Center 2003.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

6/57

3

Merton and the Kyoto school. Nevertheless, there are enough similarities to provide a

basis for comparison.

The questions that are being asked about Merton in connection with so-called

eastern topics usually deal with Buddhism, Zen, or the Far East in general. This easily

leads to oversimplifications and generalizations because it is difficult to accurately

portray the details of such vast traditions. This is usually not an issue for most. However,

when involved in philosophical discourse, oversimplification creates unnecessary

ambiguity and confusion.

Consider first the entirety of Christianity which exhibits a great diversity of

teachings ranging from Catholicism to Jehovahs Witnesses. Even individual

denominations within Christianity can have diverse interpretations and practices. For

example, current-day American Catholic parishes do not always practice what Rome

proclaims, such as San Franciscos Most Holy Redeemer parish in which most of the

parishioners are homosexual. Traditionally, official Catholic teaching has consistently

judged all homosexual acts as at once unnatural and gravely sinful, forcing gays who

choose to practice Catholicism either to hide their sexuality or to find a more accepting

church.7

Furthermore, all Christian denominations have varying stances on nearly any

issue that faces the church. The number of denominations is testimony to the diversity of

interpretation within Christianity.

Also consider the entirety of Buddhism which, for example, exhibits the division

between the Mahayana and Theravada (Hinayana) traditions. Here, one tradition places

more emphasis on conversion and social action while the other tradition focuses more on

7 Charles R. Morris, American Catholic, 352 Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism: New Edition, 995.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

7/57

4

contemplation. 8 Yet still, this is how Mahayana has traditionally portrayed their

distinction and there is a growing body of research that criticizes this distinction as over

simplistic. However, even within the Mahayana tradition there are further differences

such as the dramatic difference between a belief in salvation through other-power as in

Pure Land Buddhism and a belief in salvation through self-power as in Zen Buddhism. 9

Because Christianity and Buddhism are very diverse, comparing anything such as

the ideas of Thomas Merton to either tradition as a whole is very difficult. As stated

above, this issue can easily be overlooked. Partially to avoid the overgeneralization of a

tradition, I will investigate the concept of self as it is manifest in Mertons writing in

comparison to the same concept in Abe Masaos writing. According to H.C. Steyn, the

self was undoubtedly the subject on which [Merton] wrote the most.10

Mertons notion

of the self was influenced by Zen and by the end of his life his theories on the self could

be expressed in both Zen and Christian terms.11

Likewise, Abe Masao has written

extensively on the concept of the self such as in Zen and Comparative Studies and

Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue.

When one relates to another, both benefit because people are easily brought closer

by their similarities. In a time when misunderstandings about other cultures can lead to

fear and misplaced anger, relating to others is increasingly important. However, by

speaking with people one ascertains that it is easy for many Christians in America to

know little about both either the practices or the more substantial internals of other faiths.

8I use the word conversion not to imply a negative connotation, but rather out of a lack for a more

concise way of capturing the practices of the Mahayana tradition. Also note that this is not meant to implythat which evangelism orwitnessingmay imply in Christian traditions.

9Salvation here is not meant to imply salvation in a Christian context of heaven and God, but rather it

should be read more generally.10 Steyn, 8.11 Ibid.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

8/57

5

These people often have impressions of these cultures and faiths most likely based on the

things they hear and see on television and the Internet that do not necessarily reflect the

complete truth. Abe Masao agrees, stating that contrary to the advancement of technology

and international communication, we know very little about the inner meaning of

spiritual and religious traditions not our own.12 Furthermore, it is unfortunate that people

often fear and hate that which they do not understand. This is evident in comments I have

heard recently concerning Islam such as, All Muslims are terrorists, or All Muslims

are trained to kill Christians. If, instead, the people who believe these comments

understood that Islam is a religion built on fundamentals of peace and law and that maybe

only a small portion of radicals hold true to these ideas, they might be able to embrace

Muslims instead of hating them. Likewise, grave misunderstandings can surface

concerning other religions such as Buddhism. Understanding Buddhism is important

because learning about something relieves the fear spawned from the ignorance involved

in statements such as those above. Therefore, understanding unfamiliar concepts and

cultures can lead one from ignoring and pushing away to one embracing that which had

been feared and hated.

Understanding something helps one to embrace it, and in fully understanding

something one must relate it back to ones own life. Thomas Merton asserts that true

communication goes beyond conceptual knowledge. He affirms that communication must

be, communion beyond the level of words, a communion in authentic experience.13

The importance of experience over concepts is illustrated by the fact that growing up

Christian and taking a class on Christianity are two very different things. For a person

12 Masao Abe, Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue, 3.13 Thomas Merton, The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton, 315.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

9/57

6

who is brought up as a Christian, Christianity is an integral part of his or her life, whereas

a person who takes a class in Christianity may only assume knowledge of some Christian

concepts. However, if one who has grown up as a Buddhist takes a class that closely

examines the similarities between Buddhism and Christianity, one will more easily relate

a Christians experience to ones own experience within Buddhism. It is more likely,

then, for one to dwell on ideas of other traditions that are new to oneself until they

become part of oneself as authentic experience. So, finding similarities and drawing

parallels between Buddhism and Christianity helps Buddhists and Christians to

understand and embrace people of Christianity and Buddhism, respectively.

Therefore I will compare the self within each particular system for two reasons.

First, the self has been extensively studied by both individuals. Secondly, the self can be

approached, conceptually, as the central resting point of nearly every facet of Buddhism

and Christianity from creation to salvation. The self is an important concept for both

Buddhism and Christianity and therefore is ideal for comparison.14

Before exploring the similarities and differences of the self within Mertons and

Abes writings, defining what the self is or is not is necessary. For both thinkers, the self

is the base or starting point for any individuals experience, both spiritually and non-

spiritually. The way in which that base operates then has a substantial impact on the

individuals experience. In other words, if a persons self is properly aligned with God,

that person will have a more meaningful and fulfilling existential experience, whereas if a

14There is a great diversity of thought on the self throughout Buddhism and Christianity. For example,

in Buddhism, the notion of true self is essentially a Kyoto-Zen construct, while the notion of anatman

is much more widely accepted as a tenet of Buddhism.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

10/57

7

persons self is improperly aligned and based on falsity, then he or she will lead a less

existentially fulfilling life.15

The self penetrates every aspect of ones life.

However, it seems that the two views of the self have differing functions within

their respective systems. While Mertons view of the self may resemble Abes view, its

function within the context of Mertons Catholicism is not analogous to its function

within the context of Abes Kyoto School of Philosophy. The differences between

Merton and Abe on the notion of the self will be addressed in the conclusion.

This paper will show how Mertons view of the self is compatible and consistent

with the Abes view of the self by first analyzing the two systems separately, describing

their influences, their focal points, and their overall functions. This will be followed by

an introductory comparison of the systems, and will continue by focusing on the idea of

the self within each system, comparing and contrasting the two philosophical theories.

This will be accomplished by interpreting Mertons concepts using the language and

ideas that are characteristic of Abe Masao.

My thesis will examine the question, in which ways does Thomas Mertons view

of the self correspond to Abe Masaos and how do they differ, against the broader context

of Buddhist-Christian dialogue. It will prove that they are similar views with their basis

in the notions ofkenosis and Shunyata, but they are expressed differently and their

functions differ within their own wider religious contexts: Christianity and Buddhism. It

will also argue that for both Merton and Abe the self in essence is a no-self in the sense

that the self must, paradoxically, be transcended to realize its own true nature. Following

this, a new definition ofplerosis based on the thought of Thomas Merton and Abe Masao

will help to further philosophically unite Christianity and Buddhism.

15 Although the term God appears in the Kyoto school, it is not commonly used in Buddhist texts.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

11/57

8

CHAPTER 1: THOMAS MERTON AND THE SELF

After briefly looking at the current situation of comparing Thomas Merton to

Buddhism and Abe Masao, we must define what the self looks like in Mertons writings.

This chapter will examine his influences, why the self is important to Merton, and then

explore the focal points of his notion of the self.

MERTONS INFLUENCES

Although it is difficult to ascertain exactly what factors influence anyones

development, one important factor that influences the development of those who are

literate is things one has read. In examining Mertons writings, a handful of individuals

and their writings stand out. Mertons influences include Saint Bernard of Clairvaux,

Saint Thomas Aquinas, Blessed John Ruysbroeck, Saint Teresa of Avila, and Saint John

of the Cross, most of who are medieval Catholic mystics. Later in his life, as his

spirituality and religious views matured, he was more influenced by medieval mystic

Meister Eckhart and by Buddhist thinker D.T. Suzuki, whom he corresponded with

before their meeting in 1964. Merton was also influenced to some degree by

existentialism and the existentialist philosopher, Sren Kierkegaard. Additionally,

according to Paul Bernadicou, S.J., Mertons affirmation of the truth in other faiths in

such as Protestantism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism is reminiscent of two people he

very much admired, Mahatma Gandhi and Dorothy Day.16

16 Bernadicou affirms that Merton makes this affirmation in his book titled Conjectures of a Guilty

Bystander. Quote is from Paul Bernadicou, The Eastward Turn of Thomas Merton, 357.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

12/57

9

Because Kierkegaards terms are useful for explaining Mertons thought on the

self, his background and some of his ideas will be summarized here. Also, because this

paper focuses on an aspect of Thomas Mertons writing in relation to a segment of

Buddhist philosophy, the most important of Mertons influences here are Meister Eckhart

because his theology has been interpreted Buddhistically and D.T. Suzuki because of his

role within modern-day Buddhism.

Born in 1813 and died in 1855, Sren Kierkegaard was the Christian Danish

philosopher attributed with the birth of existentialism who often dealt with questions

concerning faith and religion. In his work titled Either/Or, he describes three modes of

existence: the aesthetical mode of existence, the ethical mode of existence, and the

religious mode of existence. For Kierkegaard the three modes of existence are

progressive: the aesthetical mode of existence is the first and lowest, and the religious

mode of existence is the third and highest. The aesthetical mode of existence is

exemplified by one who does not make any important decisions, but rather merely floats

through a life determined by the notions of pleasant and unpleasant. Kierkegaard says

that the aesthete has no real personality and will eventually find him or herself in despair.

He or she will need to make a leap to the ethical mode, in which ones decisions bring

oneself into existence. One in the ethical mode of existence can then make a leap of faith

into the religious mode of existence, which is characterized in Christianity as letting go of

rationality to accept the paradox in Christs simultaneous divinity and humanity.

Father of the Rhineland school of mysticism, one of the most influential and

profound (some would say dangerous) Christian mystics, and possibly the Christian

mystic that seems closest to Buddhist thinking, Meister Johann Eckhart of Hocheim,

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

13/57

10

Germany was born about 1260 and died in 1327.17 Shortly after his death, many of his

writings were condemned, pronounced heretical, or suspected by the Catholic Church.18

However, during his life, Eckhart was a preacher and a member of the Dominican order

whose writings gathered elements from great predecessors such as Dionysius the

Areopagite, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas.19 His immediate effect can be seen in his

younger contemporaries, Suso, Tauler, and Ruysbroeck, while his lasting effect is

apparent in more recent figures such as Thomas Merton.20

Consequently, his central ideas

have remained to be a major influence in mystical thinking of both Christian and

Buddhist traditions. The core of Eckharts thought, argues David E. Linge, Professor of

Religious Studies at University of Tennessee, is the possibility of the individual

Christian experiencing union with God, unmediated by likeness or concept, and the

importance of poverty as the preparatory means for mystical experience.21

Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, who was born in 1870 in Kanazawa, Japan, and died in

1966, was the founder of the Eastern Buddhist Society, author of many books on

Buddhism, and an instrumental figure in spreading Zen to the West. Merton and Suzuki

corresponded from 1959 to 1965 and met in New York in the summer of 1964. It is

evident in their letters and Mertons journals that as their friendship grew they shared a

respect for each other and a desire for understanding each others tradition. Merton writes

to Suzuki:

I am much happier with 'emptiness' when I don't have to talk about it. Youhave the knack of saying things about it that do not completely obscure it.

17Rufus M. Jones, Studies in Mystical, 218, 241. Please note that Eckharts year of birth and death as

well has his birthplace are disputed.18

Ibid., 241.19

Sidney Spencer, Mysticism in World, 238.20 Ibid.21 David E. Linge, Mysticism, Poverty and Reason in the Thought of Meister Eckhart, 470.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

14/57

11

But I do not. As soon as I say something then, that is 'not it' right away.Obviously the conclusion is to say nothing, and that for a great deal of the

time is what I manage to do. Yet one must speak of it. Obviously, onemust speak and not speak. I am glad you are far away or you would settle

the question with thirty blows of the hossu. But at any rate I thought you

would be happy to know that I struggle with thenot problem, but koan.It is not really for me a serious intellectual problem at all, but a problem of'realization'something that has to break through. Every once in a while it

breaks through a little. One of these days it will burst out.22

And again in Mertons journals after meeting Suzuki, he writes that their meeting, after

ten years of interestedly reading his books, was especially important to him because it

allowed him to experience a deep understanding between himself and Suzuki.23

It is

clear that, over the years, Suzuki positively influenced Merton and provided some insight

into understanding Zen and Buddhism.

IMPORTANCE OF THE SELF

Thomas Merton describes the self as the essence that gives meaning to salvation,

which is one of the most important issues posed to Christians. Salvation should be of

ultimate concern to every Christian (and those of other religions as well) at some point in

his or her religious life. If one defines salvation as the basic principle of deliverance from

eternal bondage, then, from a religious point of view, salvation affects every person

because every person, in some way, either experiences salvation or does not. For

Christians this involves faith in Jesus Christ and for Buddhists this involves liberation

from samsara. Furthermore, there is no middle ground when it comes to salvation.

Therefore, informing those who have not experienced and will not otherwise experience

salvation is important.

22 Robert E. Daggy, Ed., Encounter: Thomas Merton &D.T. Suzuki, 52.23 Ibid., 85.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

15/57

12

However, the concept of salvation is just a concept, which, by its nature, is

intangible. This makes understanding salvation in experiential terms difficult, because the

things most people know are the things they can experience with their five senses. So,

how can one talk about the rather abstract concept of salvation in concrete terms that

normal people can adequately grasp? Attaching the concept of salvation to something that

every person already has and can easily talk about and understand is the most practical

method to bring it closer to a concrete thing that anybody can easily grasp. Since

attaching something that people cannot physically sense to something that people can

physically sense is difficult, if not impossible, Merton uses the self, to some degree, as a

vehicle to talk about salvation.

To some extent, Merton agrees with Sren Kierkegaard who contends that one

does not truly exist until his or her inner infinity announces itself, and once one exists,

one must release the self.24

Essentially, Merton and Kierkegaard share the belief that the

self is of primary importance because in it lays ones salvation. For Kierkegaard, the birth

of the self is on the path to salvation, which culminates with a self-sacrificial leap of

faith. However, Thomas Merton expresses this salvation as Meister Eckhart and Paul

have: salvation is the death of the self so that we may have the will of Christ. Salvation

occurs when a fundamental shift within the person occurs. Furthermore, Merton affirms

that, The reason why we hate one another and fear one another is that we secretly or

openly hate and fear our own selves.25 Salvation (of self) relieves self-hatred and Merton

24These ideas are expressed in Kierkegaards Either/Or. However, to prove this connection between

Merton and Kierkegaard would be the topic of another paper, so for now we will just use Kierkegaardianterms to help express the importance of the self to Merton and to augment our discussion of the self.

25 Thomas Merton, The Living Bread, xii-xiii.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

16/57

13

was interested in helping to relieve people of some of their hatred and fear in hopes of

bringing them closer to unity under the loving God.

MERTONS SELF

Merton defines the self in two parts: false self and true self. The dichotomy he

draws is useful for visualizing the abstract concept of the self. Furthermore, the

connotations of the words false and true color his dissection of the self and give it

added weight within the individuals psyche. What follows here is an examination of

Thomas Mertons descriptions of the false self and the true self.

False Self

The lower self, external self, and the inferior self are all different names Merton

gives to what he commonly calls the false self. He has called it the illusory self, the outer

self, and selfhood. It is the passionate, disordered, and confused selfthe rambling and

disheveled egobut much more the tyrannical super-ego, the I, the limited and

exclusive self, selfishness, and self-will.26

Essentially, the false self is the constructed and

not-real self we attach both our desires, conscious and subconscious, and our created

identities to. Kierkegaard would say that one either does not truly exist and is likely

living in the aesthetical mode of existence or has come into the ethical mode of existence

and has not yet relinquished the self. The false self is who and what we think we are and

in essence is evil in the sense that it holds us from fulfilling our intended existences.

26 Quotation is from Thomas Merton, The New Man, 43.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

17/57

14

To better understand the

false self, imagine it in two parts:

self-identity and self-will (see

1.1). The self-identity of the false

self is the things that we think we

are and the qualities and

characteristics we think we have and are attached to. This self-identity is empowered by

its counterpart: self-will. The self-will is our striving for control of our lives and our

determinations of autonomy and independence from God.

Self-identity

The identity we create for ourselves and are attached to is the false self. This is

the identity that says when we wake up every morning, I am a doctor, I am a lawyer,

I am a good person, or I am a bad person. Merely thinking this is not the problem

rather, the false self is ones attachments to such identifications. For Adam after the fall,

the self-identity said, I am naked, or, I am god. Merton calls this the external mask

which seems to be real and which lives by a shadowy autonomy for the brief moment of

earthly existence.27

Kierkegaard agrees with Mertons sentiment and affirms that if

ones inner infinity does not announce itself and the person does not move from the

aesthetical mode of existence to the ethical mode of existence, then the person may have

just as well never existed. Although it is better to exist in the ethical mode than to not-

exist in the aesthetical mode, one is still living estranged from God in what much of

27 Thomas Merton, New Seeds of Contemplation, 295.

self-identity

the body

self-image

ones

characteristics,qualities, and

titles

self-will

control

determinations

of autonomy

independencefrom God

worldly desires

The false self

Figure 1.1. The false self.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

18/57

15

Christianity traditionally calls sin. For our purposes here, Kierkegaards ethical mode of

existence is analogous to what Thomas Merton calls the false self.

Because people base such a great portion of their self-identities on self-image, the

body can be an important factor in ones self-identity. It is possible that a persons self-

identity can become completely entangled with this notion of physicality. In other words,

it is easy to mistake and become attached to the body as the whole self. This problem is

especially harmful in America which is flooded by the medias virtually unattainable

ideals of the perfectly thin, perfectly beautiful, and perfectly happy. These things are not

bad in and of themselves rather, they are good things to some degree as long as they are

attained more naturally without harming oneself. However, concerning the ideas of self-

image and self-identity, these things can greatly obfuscate freedom from the false self

when they are portrayed as the norm. Instead of striving for an internal purity, people

become fixated on these mirages of so-called perfection, most often never realizing their

distraction. While the body is most definitely part of a persons self-identity and can be a

significant portion of ones false self, the whole self is not the same thing as the body.

While one does not physically exist the other does, while one was not created by God the

other was, and while one is evil the other is not. In Mertons words, The body is neither

evil nor unreal. It has a reality that is given it by God, and this reality is therefore holy. 28

For Merton, the body is not analogous to the self, opening him to possible ascetic

interpretation. However, instead of ascetically denying the body, one should

paradoxically affirm the body and let go of it because the problem lies not in the body

itself, but rather in ones attachment to it.

28 Ibid., 26.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

19/57

16

Self-will

The will we create for ourselves is the false self. This is the blind will that

screams at us, I am in control, and, I dont need God, I am doing just fine by myself.

Again, this is the self-will that Merton spoke of in his autobiography:

Providence, that is the love of God, is very wise in turning away from the

self-will of men, and in having nothing to do with them, and leaving themto their own devices, as long as they are intent on governing themselves,

to show them to what depths of futility and sorrow their own helplessnessis capable of dragging them.

29

Wanting or being attached to total control over your life is a dangerous

manifestation of the false self. Note that there is a difference between wantingcontrol of

your life through your own power and havingcontrol of your life by paradoxically

relinquishing your will. The former can only lead to spiritual alienation while the latter is

a result of spiritual union. The major difference here is between tryingand doing. Trying

to do something implies placing a goal ahead of oneself. However, this goal is only an

illusion and barrier to its acquisition because one is always looking ahead of oneself. In

actuality, the goal is within. By reaching for ones goal apart from oneself one actually

pushes it away, in reality making it much more difficult to reach. Once one stops trying to

do something and just does it without trying, one can easily accomplish anything. It is

unification with ones actions, whereas self-will is separation from ones actions in a

subject-object relationship.30 Therefore determinations of autonomy from God and

dependence on God both stand in the way of liberating the false self because they are acts

of will. In fact, because they originate in the self-will, they are directly opposed to

something fundamental to Mertons view of salvation: utter reliance on God.

29Thomas Merton, The Seven Storey Mountain, 136.

30 Being unified with ones actions, however, is different than control. Control is an action of will,

whereas being unified with ones actions is an action of non-will.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

20/57

17

It is this self-will that Merton calls the tyrannical super-ego, the self-will that

creates God in our own image. This is the self-will that pulls us into worshipping

ourselves or a vengeful God who is a merely projection of ourselves instead of the good

and loving God. Merton speaks of his realization of this idea:

And always I was to be punished for my sins by my sins themselves, andto realize, at least obscurely, that I was being so punished and burn in the

flames of my own hell, and rot in the hell of my own corrupt will until Iwas forced at last, by my own intense misery, to give up my own will.

31

Merton realized that he had not really been worshipping God, but rather himself and the

creations and projections of his self-will. Most importantly, he found that the self-will is

what compelled him to separation from God and had to let it go with the false self. The

self-will is the acting force separating us from God.

Likewise, self-will drives ones attachments to worldly desires.32

Here one cannot

distinguish between good and bad worldly desires as one might think one should. In other

words, the false self neither classifies the desire to help as good nor the desire to harm

as bad. Merton simply says both are worldly desires therefore, they should be

acknowledged and released with the self-will. One should not desire anything because

even though the motivation may seem good, it cannot be perfect if it arises from within

the self.

Arising of the False Self

The false self did not exist until the fall of Adam and Eve. Merton describes the

situation before the fall using the Greek word parrhesia, that is, free speech. Merton

31 Ibid.32 This is also a common sentiment in Buddhism

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

21/57

18

affirms that parrhesia symbolizes the perfect communication of mans intelligence with

God by knowledge (gnosis) and contemplation (theoria). Before the fall was the only

parrhesian time for Adam and Eve because it was the only time they were in direct

communication with God. Also, God is portrayed anthropomorphically in the first part of

Genesis because Adam and Eve were in union with God. After the fall, God is no longer

seen anthropomorphically because parrhesia and union with God was lost for Adam and

Eve. Merton also says that one of the aspects ofparrhesia was the unity of the body and

soul in Adam and Eve so that the body acted as the soul desired. Since the soul was

unified with God, Adam and Eve essentially had the will of God and acted without their

own wills.33

The false self, therefore, did not yet exist for them because it necessarily

divides us from God and separates our will from Gods will. This unity with God was lost

and the false self arose out of its ashes as a direct result of Adam and Eves sin.34

It can be said that Christ also had parrhesia, or unity with God. Furthermore,

what Christ and Adam and Eve before the fall share aside from parrhesia is their freedom

from sin. Sinlessness, therefore, is not only directly related to parrhesia, but parrhesia

arises because of ones sinlessness and not vice versa. In other words, because Adam and

Eve before the fall and Christ were united with God, they were allowed this parrhesia

their sinlessness was not a result of theirparrhesia. Because sin alienates one from God,

one cannot experience parrhesia in a life of sin. People today usually do not experience

parrhesia with God the father because everyone throughout history with the exception of

Christ shares the bondage of sin, namely original sin. So, from birth we are all driven to

separate ourselves from God by sinning.

33However, that is not to say that they did not have free will and were not creatures distinct from God.

Their free will, for instance, was exercised in the fall.34 Thomas Merton, The New Man, 71-98 quotation from 75.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

22/57

19

After the fall of Adam and Eve, sin was introduced to humanity and parrhesia

was revoked: Adam and Eve were exiled from the Garden of Eden. An alternate approach

to looking at this is from the perspective of the false self: once Adam and Eve sinned, the

false self was introduced to humanity, causing alienation from God and paradise.

Although there are more examples ofparrhesia throughout the Old Testament such as in

Job, these are examples of people who have let go of the false self and stopped

worshipping a vengeful God who is only a projection of themselves and instead began

worshipping a good and loving God. In other words, these are people who did not begin

their lives with parrhesia like Christ and Adam and Eve did.

35

Therefore, the false self is a product of sin and arises primarily with original sin.

And although as sinners we do not have parrhesia with God the father, we do have

parrhesia with Christ through prayer.36

We can freely approach God through Christ in

boldness to ask, among other things, that we may have the non-strength to release the

false self and to be brought closer to the presence of God in unity and parrhesia.

True Self

On the other hand, there is what Thomas Merton calls the upper self, the superior

self, or the inner self: the true self. He also refers to it as the deep self, the real self, and

original nature. The true self is our inmost self, the new man, our other self, and the

mysterious and unknown self. Essentially, the true self is the actual present self as it is

expressed out of union with God. Kierkegaard would equate the true self with the highest

way of life, that is, the religious mode of existence. For Kierkegaard, living in the

35Ibid., 95-96.

36 This distinction between parrhesia with God the father and parrhesia with Christ is intended to echo

the notion that one cannot attain ones own salvation, but in Christ everyone has salvation.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

23/57

20

religious mode of existence means that one has taken a leap of faith to leave behind his or

her rationality to accept what Kierkegaard considers the completely irrational truths of

Christianity. This leap of faith, for Merton, means leaving the false self behind in an act

of grace to become united with God. Raymond Bailey, author ofThomas Merton on

Mysticism, describes the person as a vessel. He says:

When the vessel has been scrubbed, the soul returns as it were to a pristinenothingness, ready to receive true being. As a polished crystal is able to

reflect light, so the polished soul has the capacity to reflect the grace ofGod.37

Kierkegaards leap constitutes a scrubbing of the vessel in the sense that since the person,

or vessel, is polluted by the ethical mode of existence, one is cleansed of this pollution

when the ethical mode of existence is transcended. Then one can rely completely on

another power to determine ones existence.

Essentially, the true self is a positive spiritual condition and the false self is a

negative spiritual condition. In ones current situation, however, thinking of the false self

as a negative spiritual condition may be difficult because the attitudes and behaviors that

the false self implies seem to be good things, namely, control, determination, and

independence. This is especially difficult in a culture where these things are not only

strongly emphasized, but they are the basis for everything one sees as positive. And

although there are many good people who do many virtuous things having never let go of

the false self, it is still better to let it go. Although these virtuous people are doing many

wonderful things, they often have motivations or agendas that arise out of the false self

because in the false self ones motives cannot be totally pure. Merton affirms that the true

self, on the other hand, relieves one of motivations and agendas, making every act an act

37 Raymond Bailey, Thomas Merton on Mysticism, 85.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

24/57

21

of worship. More fundamentally, as Bailey affirms, in the true self one sees the world and

God as they are in and of themselves.38

The true self is perpetual simultaneous self-negation and self-affirmation in God.

It is self-negation in the sense that we must completely give up that which we hold so

dearly: the false self. This must happen not by our own self-will but by the grace of God,

for we must, in this act of self-negation, give up the self-will. Merton asserts, [God]

created man with a soul that was made not to bring itself to perfection in its own order,

but to be perfected by Him in an order infinitely beyond the reach of human powers.39

Furthermore, the true self is self-affirmation in the sense that we become more complete

as a result of our unification with God in the true self. Merton affirms that when one

leaves the false self behind, Man is not cut in half, he is drawn together and finds

himself more of one piece, more integrated than ever before.40

In other words, in the true

self we are actively fulfilling Gods purpose for our lives from moment to moment. In

Mertons words:

Our ordinary life, cluttered and obstructed as it is by our own bad habits ofthought and action as well as by the bad habits of the society we live in, is

little more than a semi-conscious, torpid kind of existence when it iscompared with the real life of our deep selves--the life that we are all

supposed to be leading.41

The true self is the freedom from ourselves that God intends us to have.

38Ibid., 84.

39Thomas Merton, The Seven Storey Mountain, 185.

40 Thomas Merton, The New Man, 64.41 Ibid.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

25/57

22

Body and Soul

Just as the false self cannot be confused with the body, the true self cannot be

confused with the soul. In fact, the true self is concerned with neither just the body nor

just the soul, but rather the whole person. Merton writes, It is equally false to treat the

soul as if it were the whole self and the body as if it were the whole self.42

The whole

person, or whole self, is the body and soul mysteriously joined as one. The false self and

the true self can, therefore, be thought of as two different modes of existence in which the

whole self operates.

One could argue that to negate the false self, one should ascetically deny the body

to weaken it so that the soul may have the opportunity to perform its action of unity with

God. However, the body does not hold down the soul in the same sense that the false self

holds down the true self instead, the false self metaphorically stands in between the body

and soul, hindering their communication with each other. Since the body and soul are not

in a struggle against one another, and since the denial of the body requires an act of will,

denying the body is unnecessary and counterproductive in regards to the false self and the

true self. For, when the true self is realized, the body will be perfectly subjected to the

soul in the same way that the person will be perfectly subjected to God.

Likewise, since the true self is not just self-negation but rather simultaneous self-

negation and self-affirmation, and the body is part of the whole self, the true self does not

negate the body but it simultaneously negates and affirms the body as an integral part of

the self. In this sense, the body and soul are denied in terms of attachment to sense

pleasures and worldly desires and simultaneously affirmed as being actively involved as a

42 Thomas Merton, New Seeds of Contemplation, 27.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

26/57

23

united vessel for God. In other words, instead of denying either the body or the soul, they

both must be affirmed, accepted, and let go of.

Poverty

The true self is analogous to Meister Eckharts notion of spiritual poverty.

Spiritual poverty refers to the poor in spirit beatitude in Jesus Sermon on the Mount

which has been open to diverse interpretation due to its seemingly counter-intuitive

nature.43

Meister Eckharts sermon titled The Poor in Spirit delivers his interpretation

of the first beatitude. In it he describes two types of poverty, outward and inward, stating

that while outward poverty is virtuous, it is not the poverty referred to in the Sermon on

the Mount. Eckhart writes that interior poverty consists of a threefold nothing: willing

nothing, knowing nothing,

and having nothing. He

categorizes these three

nothings as the deepest

poverty, the barest poverty,

and the strictest poverty,

respectively (see 1.2).44

Concerning

Eckharts deepest poverty, willing nothing, he mentions those who do not follow their

own will but instead try following the will of God. Eckhart says that while this is

virtuous, they are not poor in spirit for they are still willing Gods will to be done through

43 The HarperCollins Study Bible: New Revised Standard Edition, 1865.44 Franz Pfeiffer, Ed., Meister Eckhart, 217, 218-220.

Outward Poverty

poor in money, goods,and other material

possessions

Inward Poverty

Willing nothing: deepest

Knowing nothing: barest

Having nothing: strictest

Poverty

Figure 1.2. Meister Eckharts poverty.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

27/57

24

them and therefore are not willing nothing. Eckhart writes, If he is genuinely poor a man

is as free from his created will as he was when he was not.45

The barest poverty, being

poor of all particular knowledge, means that one should be free from, among other

things, the knowledge of God and what God is doing within oneself. There is something

at the core of the soul from which both knowledge and love flow, which, knows

nothing about working in itself but, it just is itself, enjoying itself God-fashion.46

The

most stringent poverty, having nothing, can be interpreted in the context of self-negation

which Stephen Morris argues is unquestionably Eckharts single major theme.47

In the

context of this paper, having nothing means the absence of the dualistic subject-object

logic so that one will not have anything in the sense that there will be no I to have some

thing (i.e. material objects, emotions, God, etc.).48

As Bernard McGinn puts it, One must

strive to become as free from ones created will as one was before creationan empty

existence (ledic sin) in which God as creator no longer is of concern.49

Thomas Mertons true self and Meister Eckharts spiritual poverty are, essentially

the same thing. The only major difference is the ways in which they are expressed:

cataphatically or apophatically. Mertons true self is expressed cataphatically, that is,

using positive terms. For example, Merton always says that one can find the true self or

45 Ibid., 218.46 C. F. Kelley, 219.47 Stephen Morris, Buddhism and Christianity: The Common Ground, 106.48See the index of Kelleys Meister Eckhart on Divine Knowledge under the entry poverty of the

spirit for a brilliant example of Eckharts spiritual poverty being referred to as emptiness without the use

of the constructs of language.49 Bernard McGinn, 136. However, McGinn is slightly off the mark in saying that one should strive

for spiritual poverty because the act of striving creates a dualism in which the one who is striving becomes

the subject and the goal of spiritual poverty becomes the object. This also brings the notion of will into the

picture, for one must make a conscious effort to strive. Furthermore, this contradicts the idea of the grace ofGod as the chief means for salvation. For, if one were to be able to attain spiritual poverty of ones own

striving will alone, God would be removed from the picture and thus putting Eckhart into a self-power

category. Eckharts sermon, Detachment Has Four Steps, speaks of detachment happening to a person,not through any action of a person, and C. F. Kelley points out that Eckhart clearly views the Holy Spirit as

the Transformer.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

28/57

25

have the true self, which is the positive language more characteristic of the majority of

Christianity. On the other hand, Eckharts spiritual poverty is expressed apophatically,

that is, using negative terms. Eckhart refers to having no self, which is the negative

language more characteristic of the majority of Buddhism. However, with the terms and

language they use aside, Merton and Eckhart are speaking about the same thing: union

with the divine.

Finding the True Self

There is a Buddhist saying, If you meet Buddha on the road, kill him. Likewise,

if you meet the true self along the road, kill it. From what I understand of the Buddhist

saying, this means that one should not get caught up in the constructs of language and

thinking about these things by attaching meaning to objects, but instead one should

experience the thing-in-itself. If you meet what you think and know is Buddha, kill it

because it will only serve as either an obstacle or a crutch and you will be better off

without it. The concept you can have of the Buddha is greatly weaker than the reality of

the Buddha. Likewise, if you come across that which you think and know is the true self,

kill it because it only opposes liberation from the false self. The concept of the true self is

much less important than the reality and experience of the true self. Additionally, the

Buddha on the road is a symbol for seeing the Buddha as an external object, separate

from you. However, the real Buddha and the true self are your true nature.

Furthermore, as H.C. Steyn argues, Merton places an emphasis on the primacy of

religious experience over concepts. Steyn affirms that Merton saw that Zen, instead of

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

29/57

26

explaining things like much of Christianity, aims at experiencing things on a level above

words and concepts.50

He writes:

Buddhist meditation, but above all that of Zen, seeks not to explain, but to

pay attention, to become aware, to be mindful, in other words to develop acertain kind of consciousness that is above and beyond description byverbal formulasor by emotional excitement.

51

Perhaps Merton believed that Christianity could learn from Zen in this respect. In other

words, instead of filling our minds with knowledge about God and religious concepts, we

need to empty our minds with the direct experience of the divine.

Mertons self fits in with the ideas of great Christian mystics such as Meister

Eckhart. Moreover, while Eckharts ideas are expressed more Buddhistically and have

been labeled as unorthodox or even heresy, they are not meant to be expressions of

Buddhist ideas within the framework of Christianity. Instead, they are to transcend

categories and concepts and are aimed at direct religious experience. Likewise, Mertons

notion of the true self functions in the same way and therefore must be approached

similarly as a means to experience the true self.

However, letting go of the false self is difficult because seeing around its mask of

seemingly positive outcomes is not easy. As I stated above, the false self is striving for

and attachment to control over ones life and independence. Although one might wish,

actually make a concerted effort, and even believe that one is wholly dependent on God,

the false self is a blindfold that tricks one into believing this. Like Platos allegory of the

cave, when one gets a peak at the light of the true self, it is so bright that at first it is

painful and can be mistaken as a bad thing. Similarly, leaving behind ones rationality in

50 H.C. Steyn, The Influence of Buddhism on Thomas Merton, 4-5.51 Thomas Merton, Zen and the Birds of Appetite, 38.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

30/57

27

Kierkegaards leap of faith is difficult because one cannot be completely sure that one

will be right, and the price of being wrong is insanity. Just as Kierkegaards leap of faith

is frightening, so too is leaving behind the false self. Immediately retreating into the false

self where one feels safe and has so-called control over his or her life is therefore very

easy. One must, however, resist the temptation to replace the blindfold by rejoicing in the

freedom we have in God.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

31/57

28

CHAPTER 2: ABE MASAO AND THE SELF

Now that we have examined Thomas Mertons view of the self in depth, we will

similarly examine Abe Masaos view of the self. This chapter will look at his influences,

why the self is important to Abe, and explore the focal points of his self.

ABES INFLUENCES

Because Abe Masao belongs to the Kyoto School of Philosophy and has also been

deeply involved in interfaith dialogue, his influences can be divided into three categories:

western philosophical influences, religious thought influences, and Buddhist influences.

Donald W. Mitchell, in Masao Abe: a Zen life of dialogue, lists Abes western

philosophical influences as Plato, Aristotle, Saint Augustine, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche,

Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and Whitehead. Abes religious thought influences include Paul

Tillich and Reinhold Niebuhr, and his Buddhist influences include Dogen, Shinran,

Nishida Kitar, Nishitani Keiji, Shinichi Hisamatsu, and D.T. Suzuki.52

Because this paper focuses on how an aspect of Abe Masaos writing relates to

Thomas Mertons thought, the most important of Abes influences here are D.T. Suzuki,

Nishida Kitar, and Nishitani Keiji because of their connections to the Kyoto School of

Philosophy. However, since we have highlighted Suzuki in the previous chapter, we will

only say that Abes position on Buddhism is, according to Stephen Morris, the same as

Suzukis.53

Here we will focus on just Nishida Kitar and Nishitani Keiji.

52 Donald W. Mitchell, Ed., Masao Abe: a Zen life of dialogue, xvi.53 Morris, 105.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

32/57

29

Nishida Kitar, the founder of the Kyoto School of Philosophy, was born in 1870,

the third year of the Meiji period, and died in 1945. Because eastern and western cultures

came face-to-face in Japan during the Meiji era, Nishida was presented with a newly

unique opportunity to contemplate eastern philosophical issues in the fresh light that

western philosophy shined on them. Nishidas original and creative philosophy,

incorporating ideas of both Zen and western philosophy, was aimed at bringing the East

closer to the West. In fact, Nishidas philosophy reached so far westward that Merton

interpreted Nishida in the light of his own thorough training in Western philosophical and

theological traditions.

54

Perhaps Mertons interest in Nishida stemmed from the focal

points of Nishidas philosophy: direct experience, the discovery of the self, and fidelity

to life. Later in his life, however, Nishida leaned more toward a political philosophy,

saying that, The world...has already become a single environment, and the whole of

humanity is caught up in the crisis of how to handle the fact.55

Taken as a whole,

Nishidas life work was the foundation for the Kyoto School of Philosophy and the

inspiration for the original thinking of his disciples.

One of Nishidas disciples, Nishitani Keiji was born in 1900 and died in 1990. He

became the principal chair of religion at Kyoto University around 1943. After his

banishment of holding any public position by the United States Occupation authorities in

July 1946, Nishitani refrained from drawing practical social conscience into

philosophical and religious ideas, preferring to think about the insight of the individual

rather than the reform of the social order. Because the nature of Nishitanis philosophy

was expressed more religiously and subjectively, he felt ideologically closer to the

54 Michiko Yusa, Zen & Philosophy, xvi-xvii. Quotation is from xx.55 Quotations from James W. Heisig, Philosophers of Nothingness, 40 and 93.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

33/57

30

existentialists and the mystics, namely Kierkegaard and Eckhart, than the scholars and

theologians who more objectively expressed their ideas. Nishitani, the stylistic superior

of Nishida, brought Zen poetry, religion, literature, and philosophy organically together

in his work to help lay the difficult foundations of breaking free of the Japanese language

in a similar way as Pascal or Nietzsche had for western language. 56 Furthermore, unlike

Nishida, who had focused on building a philosophical system and who, toward the end of

his career, began focusing on political philosophy, Nishitani focused on creating a

standpoint from which he could enlighten a broader range of topics, and wrote more on

Buddhist themes towards the end of his career.

57

IMPORTANCE OF THE SELF

Abe stresses the self in his writing however, his interest in the self is not

singularly rooted in the idea of salvation like Mertons is. Abes interest in the self can be

divided into two components: salvation through kenosis and interfaith dialogue.

Abe Masao, coming from Zen, a tradition that emphasizes practice and experience

over concepts and knowledge, approaches Christianity similarly. As Stephen Morris

suggests, Christians are not only more likely to discuss what they believe instead of what

they do to enrich their spiritual lives, they more easily discuss their beliefs. This is

exemplified by theologians who discuss abstract concepts instead of practicalities of

faith. He identifies this as a problem with Christians expression of Christianity, saying

56The Japanese language is not only more difficult to master than western languages, it is also more

formal, meaning that it has been historically much more difficult for people to break free of its confines. As

a result, Nishida and Nishitani received a fair amount of criticism for their unorthodox approaches to andimplementations of the Japanese language.

57 Ibid., 185-190.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

34/57

31

that ones spiritual life is like ones body: if you do not exercise, you will be unhealthy.

Likewise, if you do not exercise your spiritual life, it will be unhealthy.

Because Abe views religion more as a practice than a set of beliefs, he

approaches Christianity not questioning what one is expected to believe but rather what

one is supposed to do.58 Therefore, in approaching the scriptures Abe is drawn toward the

idea of the kenosis, or the self-emptying, of Christ and Christs acknowledgement that

people must empty themselves. Jesus expresses this self-emptying by saying, he that

finds his life shall lose it and he who loses his life for my sake shall find it.59

Abe would

like for both Christianity and Buddhism to adjust from their focus on the philosophizing

and scholasticism characteristic of theology to a focus on spirituality or mystical

experience and its relation to theology.60

This shifting of focus would help regular people

understand more of the theological fine points of Christianity and Buddhism. In short, it

would help people to focus on living out Gods will in their lives moment to moment

instead of focusing on what set of ideas they believe in, resulting in a deeper, stronger,

and fuller understanding of God based on their own experience. Living out Gods will

and a deep and full understanding of God are important to ones salvation because they

result from kenosis.

Interfaith dialogue is likewise important to Abe because there is an intellectual

gulf between Buddhism and Christianity that cannot be crossed using current

interpretations of the two religions. Abe argues that Buddhism and Christianity both have

to begin a process of self-purification, reaching deeper to find a basis for true

communication. He shows that a deep understanding of the self from within each

58Stephen Morris, 105.

59 Matthew 10:39.60 Donald W. Mitchell, Spirituality and Emptiness, x.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

35/57

32

tradition can serve as the foundation for true communication and bridge this gulf between

Buddhism and Christianity.

ABES SELF

The self that Abe expresses is crafted as a response to the criticisms of religion

coming from scientism and the nihilism of the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche

(1844-1900), and serves as the foundation from which Buddhism and Christianity can

deepen themselves and relate. Therefore, our discussion of Abes self will be divided into

two sections. The first will explore Nietzsches nihilism and the second will more

specifically explore the self.

Nihilism Beyond Religion

Because Abe defines the self against the backdrop of Nietzsches nihilism, one

cannot understand the self as Abe presents it without understanding nihilism as Nietzsche

presents it. Nietzsche divides human history into three stages based on what is sacrificed

to God:

Once on a time men sacrificed human beings to their God, and perhaps

just those they loved the best...Then, during the moral epoch of mankind,they sacrificed to their God the strongest instincts they possessed, their

nature this festal joy shines in the cruel glances of ascetics and anti-natural fanatics. Finally, what still remained to be sacrificed? ... Was it

not necessary to sacrifice God himself...? To sacrifice God for

nothingnessthis paradoxical mystery of the ultimate cruelty has beenreserved for the rising generation we all know something thereofalready.

61

61 Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, 73-74.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

36/57

33

Nihilism

Nihilism before religion

realization of themeaningless of life

before the religious

experience

does not challenge the

core of religion

is overcome by

religion

Nihilism beyond religion

realization of themeaningless of life

through religion and

afterthe religious

experience

challenges the core ofreligion

is not traditionally

overcome by religion

Figure 2.1. Dichotomy within nihilism.

Nihilism is the third and final stage in which Nietzsche says that people will sacrifice

God for nothingness and is summed up by the frequently quoted and often misunderstood

phrase of his, God is dead.62 This phrase does not literally mean God is physically

dead, but rather God is no longer and cannot be an important factor in peoples lives even

if they do not recognize it. This does not undermine nihilism by saying that nihilism just

means that God is no longer important to people and everything else is natural and makes

sense. Rather, it means that because God is no longer important to people, and is in a

sense dead, everything else (things, people, life, etc.) is a random mistake and therefore

meaningless. Nihilism even further rejects physical existence.

Abe describes two

types of nihilism: nihilism

before religion and

nihilism beyond religion

(see 2.1). Nihilism before

religion is a realization of

the meaninglessness of life

before definitive religious

experience, and it therefore may be overcome by religion when one comes to have a

genuine religious experience. Conversely, nihilism beyond religion invokes the

meaningless of life after the religious experience, negates religion from within, and

challenges the core of traditional religion.63

Nihilism before religion arises out of

philosophizing and asking questions that religion can answer. In a matter of speaking,

62 Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, 181.63 The Emptying God, 8.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

37/57

34

religion can arise from within this type of nihilism, therefore negating this nihilism. One

begins with nihilism and can end up with religion. On the other hand, nihilism beyond

religion arises from within

religion, giving new answers to the

questions asked of religion. One

starts with religion and can end up

with nihilism. This type of

nihilism therefore negates religion

(see 2.2). Nietzsches nihilism is

nihilism beyond religion.

Because this nihilism arises as a result of religion, answering the questions posed

by religion, it negates religion from within. Abe distinguishes between saying God is

not and saying God is dead. God was never in existence for one who says that God is

not, whereas for one who says that God is dead God was once alive but has ceased to

exist. Nietzsche says that people have killed God essentially because God is omniscient.

People are shameful that God sees all of their dirtiest corners, and, cannot endure it

that such a witness should live.64

Therefore, people will sacrifice God for nothingness.

Although Nietzsches nihilism approaches religion from the standpoint of

Christianity, nihilism threatens any religion, including the schools of Buddhism that do

not refer to God or a divine principle. Abe says that because Nietzsches nihilism

challenges the idea that religion itself is self-evident, all religions have to confront his

nihilism and examine whether or not [it] is really nihilism beyondreligion, and assume

64 Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra, 297.

Figure 2.2. Nihilism in relation to religion.

Nihilism beyondreligion

Nihilism before religion

Religion

NihilismReligion

Nihilism

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

38/57

35

the burden of demonstrating, practically and theoretically, the raison dtre of religion. 65

Here Abe begins his proposition of how Buddhism and Christianity can both overcome

nihilism and deepen both religions.

The Self

Since Abe Masao is primarily a philosopher and secondarily a Buddhist, and

because his philosophy is a bridge between Christianity and Buddhism, he borrows

concepts from both religions to craft his philosophy. From Christianity, his exegesis of

Philippians 2:5-8, quoted below, that talks about Pauls concept of kenosis, or self-

emptying, is most eloquent, and from Buddhism, his interpretation of Shunyata, or

emptiness, deepens the philosophical discourse of Buddhism. However, since Abe

approaches Christianity from a Buddhist standpoint, his interpretations of Christian

themes tend to be expressed more Buddhistically and tend to mesh more with Buddhist

doctrines than traditional Christian interpretations of the same Christian themes. And

although this lends itself to casting Abe as an outsider interpreting Christianity, he shares

a deep appreciation for both Christianity and Buddhism. His interpretations of Christian

themes echo and are similar to Meister Eckharts because they both speak out of the

deepness of their individual and different experiences. Although Abes philosophy is a

Buddhist philosophy it is also a Christian philosophy because he seeks not to destroy or

disprove Christianity, but instead to deepen Christianity and Buddhism and bring them

closer to a more fulfilling understanding of themselves and each other.

65 The Emptying God, 9.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

39/57

36

Self-Centeredness

The false self, argues Abe, is the root source of human suffering which he sees

manifested in four forms of self-centeredness: individual, national, anthropocentric, and

religious self-centeredness. These four forms of self-centeredness form a hierarchy with

individual self-centeredness as the lowest form and religious self-centeredness as the

highest form.66

Individual self-centeredness is the ego that manifests the basic subject-object

duality one creates when aware of ones self-existence apart from others. Abe affirms that

along with the separation, attachment, and estrangement to others that comes with the

notion of I, there is always another deeper separation from oneself, self-attachment,

and self-estrangement. National self-centeredness is assuming the group self of a

sovereign nation-state that does not practice self-negation as the absolute self-identity.

This is most boldly manifested in the self-affirmation of nations controlling and

conquering smaller nations. Anthropocentric self-centeredness is assuming the standpoint

of humanity as ones substantial self-identity. Finally, religious self-centeredness is

assuming the standpoint of the ultimate principal of religion as ones substantial self-

identity. Abe argues that the self-contradiction innate to religion and salvation is the

emphasis on freeing one from ones self-centeredness on the religiously self-centered

basis of its own ultimate principle.67

Abe says, though [one has] self-identity in a relative sense [one has] no self-

identity in any absolute and substantial sense.68

In other words, one actually exists in

relation to others, but the base of ones existence is not ones substantial and absolute

66Masao Abe, Buddhism and Interfaith Dialogue, 64-72.

67 Ibid., 64-71.68 Ibid., 65, 66 quotation is from 66.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

40/57

37

unique self. The concept of I mutually requires the concept of other to exist just as

the concept of son mutually requires the concept of father to exist: they are co-

dependent. However, these concepts have no substantial existence beneath their relational

existence. Likewise, nations, humanity, and religion all have a self-identity in a relative

sense but have no self-identity in any absolute and substantial sense. 69

These four forms of self-centeredness stand as four separate walls in opposition to

the true self. When one overcomes the individual self-centeredness, one is presented with

the next in line: national self-centeredness. After national self-centeredness comes

anthropocentric self-centeredness and after anthropocentric self-centeredness comes

religious self-centeredness. Abe argues that the only way to be free from self-

centeredness is through no-self.

True Self

Generally speaking, no-self is the cataphatic remedy to self-centeredness.

Apophatically, no-self is true self. Abe Masao talks about the true self in both Christian

and Buddhist terms, using Pauls notion of kenosis and the Buddhist notion of Shunyata.

Therefore, we will divide our discussion of the true self into two sections. The first will

explore Abe Masaos interpretation of Pauls notion of kenosis, and the second will look

at Abes interpretation of the Buddhist notion of Shunyata.

Kenosis

Kenosis, Pauls term for self-emptying, literally means an emptying and is

derived from the ancient Greekkenos meaning empty. For example, in what Abe

69 Ibid., 66-68.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

41/57

38

considers one of the most impressive and touching passages in the Bible, Paul writes to

the Philippians:

Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, existing in the

form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to begrasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made inthe likeness of man and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled

himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross.70

This passage is important to Abe for two reasons. First, it says that Christ chose to give

up his divine rank and become a man, thus emptying himself. Christs humbling was

carried out even unto death. Secondly, the humility exemplified by Christs incarnation,

death, and resurrection reveals the unfathomable depth of Gods love.71

This kenosis of the Son of God, Abe argues, must be a total kenosis for him to be

Christ. In other words, one should not hold a temporal understanding of Christs nature,

that is, Christ was not originally the Son of God and then emptied himself and became

identical with humans, as in the traditional understanding of the Gospel of John where

the preexisting Logos became flesh.72

Rather, one should hold a total kenotic

understanding of Christ in which it is Christs very nature to be continually self-emptying

and that Christs kenosis is not merely a transformation in appearance, but rather it is a

transformation in substance. It is because of his self-emptying nature that he is true

person and true God: Christ, the Messiah (see 2.3). Consequently, Abe reformulates the

doctrine of Christs kenosis as follows:

The Son of God is not the Son of God (for he is essentially andfundamentally self-emptying): precisely because he is notthe Son of God

70Philippians 2:5-8.

71 The Emptying God, 9-10.72 Ibid., 10.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

42/57

39

he is truly the Son of God (for he originally and always works as Christ,the Messiah, in his salvational function of self-emptying).73

Since, as Paul says in Philippians, we are to follow in Christs kenosis, and since,

as Abe Masao has pointed out, Christs is a total kenosis, so too must ones own kenosis

be a total kenosis, that is, a complete transformation. Paul also articulates, even so

reckon you also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus, and,

We are...always bearing about in the body of the dying of Jesus, that the life of Jesus

may also be manifested in our body.74

Jesus, too, stresses, he that finds his life shall

lose it and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it. 75 Abe argues that these

passages call one to totally deny and completely put to death the ego-self or the old

person to live in Christ as the new person. Consequently, Abe says, in relation to the

human self, Self is not self (for the old self must be crucified with Christ) precisely

because it is not, self is truly self (for the new self resurrects with Christ).76

73Ibid., 12.

74Romans 6:11 and 2 Corinthians 4:10.

75 Matthew 10:3-9.76 The Emptying God, 12.

The temporal understanding of the nature of Christ

The Son of God, Logos Jesus of Nazareth Resurrected Christ

Time

The total kenotic understanding of the nature of Christ

The Son of God, Logos

Jesus of NazarethResurrected Christ,

the MessiahTime

Figure 2.3. The temporal and total kenotic understandings of the nature of Christ.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

43/57

40

Abe Masao equates these two formulations into one single principle, stating that

this is how Christians should approach their belief in Christ. In other words, for one to

have a true belief in Christ, one must accept both paradoxical formulations: Christ is not

Christ, therefore Christ is truly Christ and self is not self, therefore self is truly self. For

when one accepts these formulations and live the truth of the resurrection of Christ, one

can experience kenosis in Christ in the absolute present Now-moment, denying the ego-

self completely for the new person in Christ. Only then can one truly claim that, it is no

longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me.77

This kenosis is not, however, a one-time event, but rather it must be practiced

every moment and in every action. To illustrate this, think of a prisoner and a former

prisoner. After completing ones sentence and has freedom, one can return to criminal

behavior and be imprisoned again. Likewise, after one has experienced kenosis, one can

return to spiritually unhealthy behavior and be imprisoned by the false self again.

ShunyataAbe says that in contrast with traditional Christianity, which considers the

conceptualizable God as ultimate reality, Buddhism holds that ultimate reality is the

unconceptualizable Shunyata which literally means emptiness. And although, Shunyata

is emptiness, it cannot carry along with it the often negative connotations that come with

the English word emptiness because any connotation is contrary to its function of

emptying.78 In Christianity one is often encouraged to conceptualize God, which not only

attaches connotations to the word God, it also forces one to create a false and

illusionary version of God in ones mind. While there are many varying examples

77 Galatians 2:20.78 Masao Abe, Zen and Comparative Studies, 42.

8/3/2019 Total Kenosis True Shunyata n the Plerotic Self of Thomas Merton n Abe Masao by Joe Lencioni

44/57

41

throughout the Bible of God as a person or entity (a conceptualization) with whom

humans communicate, conceptualization of Shunyata in Buddhism is often discouraged

and considered to be impossible. Abes notion of Shunyata corresponds with much of

Buddhism and he affirms that Shunyata is unobjectifiable in the sense that it cannot be

attained by reason or will, and it is so thoroughly self-negative that it completely

empties everything including itself.79

One should not understand Shunyata as a static

state of emptiness, but rather as the pure dynamic movement of emptying.

Abe says that in order for one to truly understand Shunyata, one must keep two

considerations in mind. First, one should not approach Shunyata as a goal of Buddhism

because by making it a goal, one conceptualizes it as a thing outside of oneself in a

subject-object relationship. Shunyata exists not outside of oneself and oneself exists not

outside of Shunyata, instead, one must approach it, as the ground or point of departure

from which Buddhist life and activity can properly begin, and realize it in the absolute

and present Now-moment. Secondly, Shunyata should not be understood in its noun

form [emptiness] but in its verbal form [self-emptying], for it is a dynamic and

creative function of emptying everything and making alive everything.80

One should not

understand Shunyata as emptiness primarily because