[Buddha-l] Teaching Zen Buddhist philosophy

[Franz Metcalf]

Richard,

I am intellectually salivating over your course (if this phrase causes 
anyone to form any unappealing mental image, I'm sorry). Like you, I've 
used mostly "the classics" when teaching Buddhist courses, but I can 
still have a go at contemporaries, just for fun.

The exception to the classics is Janwillem van de Wetering's _The Empty 
Mirror_ (most recently in print through St. Martin's Griffin, 1999). It 
has what might be an excellent balance of philosophical rumination and 
rather sordid life for a course taught out of the philosophy 
department. My students love this book; I do too. His recent _Afterzen_ 
(St. Martin's, 1999) continues wrestling with the moral mess of 
contemporary Zen practice, but to my mind it's a bit scattered and 
depends on reading the first book (and that would be too much JvdW for 
one course).

As for contemporary possibilities--in addition to the authors you 
mention--how about _The Heart of Being: Moral and Ethical Teachings of 
Zen Buddhism_, by John Daido Loori Roshi (Tuttle, 1996)? I confess I 
have not read it and it may be too close to Aitken Roshi's wonderful 
_The Mind of Clover_ (which I'm sure you were thinking of when you 
mentioned him in your post). If I had to choose two and only two 
contemporary authors on Zen ethics is would surely be Aitken and Loy.)

(BTW: by mentioning me in the same sentence as Aitken Roshi and 
Professor Loy, I think you set in motion mental events that are going 
to cost me several lifetimes of ahamkaara-reducing practice. Still, as 
for this lifetime, thank you.)

In the context of Zen ethics I think I might have students read Brian 
Victoria's work. I'm wondering if chapter seven (on "imperial-way" 
Buddhism) of _Zen at War_ or chapter five (on Yasutani Roshi) of _Zen 
War Stories_ could be read out of context of the remainder of those 
books.

Finally, I love the heart (or should I say "brain"? Let's go with 
"shin") of _Zen and the Brain_, but I can't imagine assigning that 
thing to undergraduates. A few well-chosen chapters--or really excerpts 
from chapters--would suffice to raise its central questions (and I 
don't think Austin pretends to give final answers to the questions, 
anyway). Like you, I'm curious if anyone has used this book to good 
effect in teaching.

I hope others will chime in with their own thoughts. And, in light of 
Joy's recent plaint, I hope someone can correct for my 
gender-imbalanced recommendations.

Franz