Intend in the following to make sense of Zen non-sense. Fundamental Zen
terms like "naturalness" and "emptiness" and "nothingness" are used in
disregard of the COIK principle: Clear Only If Known. For example, Shunryu
Suzuki, a Zen master, said, "It is absolutely necessary for everyone to
believe in nothing." (Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind: Informal Talks on Zen
Meditation and Practice. New York and Tokyo: John Weatherhill, Inc., 1983.
Page 117) What did he have in mind when he used the word "nothing"? He also
said, "Originally we have Buddha nature." (P. 99) Again, what was he
thinking of by saying that we all are born having Buddha nature? How would
readers growing up in Western culture translate into terms familiar to them
what this Zen-trained Japanese person meant? Which senses or what
observations can be used to imagine something like nothing or to imagine
the nature of Buddha nature? I shall also speculate as to the relationship
between "nothingness," "emptiness" and "naturalness" and "zazen," or
"sitting quiet."

Here are some more statements from Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind that will
provide opportunities for translation. "The understanding passed down from
Buddha to our time is that when you start zazen, there is enlightenment
even without any preparation. Whether you practice zazen or not, you have
Buddha nature." (P. 99) " . . . without any idea of attainment, you are
always Buddha. This is the true practice of zazen. Then you may understand
the true meaning of Buddha's first statement, 'See Buddha nature in various
beings, and in every one of us.'" (P. 132)

First, let us look up the derivation of "Buddha" given in Webster's New
International Dictionary. The word is from the Sanskrit buddha, "awakened,
enlightened," from bodhati, "he awakes, is awake, observes, understands."

Now let us examine the Buddhist belief that when Gautama experienced
enlightenment, he became buddha, enlightened. While he was meditating under
the Bo tree, he awoke with a particular understanding. After that he was
called "Buddha," the Enlightened One. His enlightenment apparently included
his understanding that he and everyone else is always by nature
enlightened, is always buddha. He said, "Buddha nature is in various
beings, and in every one of us."

Twenty-five hundred years ago Gautama used the word "buddha" to describe
his awakening to a particular understanding. Those who translated his
teachings into English used the word "enlightenment" to describe this
awakening to his new understanding. The editors of Webster's Third use
"enlightenment" to describe the Buddha's experience. I wonder what goes on
in the minds of people who read this entry and who encounter the word
"enlightenment" in books about Buddhism.

The COIK principle warns us against believing we know what the Buddha and
his followers have meant by this word.

Readers of computer manuals and of instructions for putting kits together
have suffered from the technical writers' disregard of this principle. The
ancient Hindu parable of the Six Blind Men and the Elephant warns us not to
assume too quickly that we know what a user of such a word as
"enlightenment" may have meant by it -- especially if our eyes have not
been opened by having had a presumably similar experience.

What kind of "lighting" occurs in this enlightenment? To answer this
question, let us examine the notion that each of us is a Buddha, that each
of us has Buddha nature from the beginning to the end of our life. In other
words, what is it that each of us has that the Zen masters call "Buddha
nature"?

What is it that is observably, tangibly, part of us from birth till death?
Our DNA, of course. Our DNA contains our genome, all our genes. Our genes
direct the creation of our body and influence the kind of interactions we
have with our environment. From the one-celled little creature to the
multitudinously-celled adult, the DNA remains constant (unless operated on
by a surgeon's recombinant gene procedures).

This process of development appears to be true for all living beings. The
germinating daisy seed produces daisies of the same variety. The polar
bear's fertilized egg produces a polar bear. The daisy "knows" what
nutrients and the amount of sunshine and water it needs to reach maturity
and produce the next generation of daisies. The polar bear "knows" what
foods to eat and how to produce and bring up the next generation of polar
bears. Different species of plants thrive best in certain environments --
and only in those. Different species of animals thrive best in certain
environments. Each species instinctively knows best how to do its own
thing.

As an animal, the human being is from the one-celled beginning equipped for
survival. He/She bears the unwritten manual in his or her DNA. Is this in
observable terms a statement of what the Buddhist means when he says, "You
are always Buddha"? The Buddhist's statement differs from the scientist's