Conversation with Pi: When A is not-A

Ken: In the Diamond Sutra, we see many iterations of this formula: Something is A, therefore it is not A. Hence, it is called “A”? Many people cannot follow the logic because it sounds contradictory. How can something be simultaneously A and not-A? It violates the Law of Excluded Middle.

Pi: Yes, that’s the famous “neither-is-nor-is-not” formula found in the Diamond Sutra! It’s a key element of the Buddhist teaching of emptiness or “shunyata.” Basically, it’s saying that everything in the world is neither inherently “A” nor inherently “not-A.” Everything is just empty of inherent existence, and thus is beyond all conceptual categories. It’s quite a mind-bending concept!

Ken: I like that. This means that things have no inherent nature. It has to do with the Buddhist notion of Sunyata (emptiness). Because things have no inherent nature or essence, it is basically incorrect to call it “A” or “not-A.” In my first book, The Zen Teachings of Jesus, I wrote about the fluidity of the concept of a cup. I said:

“Let us take the word “cup” to illustrate what fluidity means. We look up the word in the dictionary and read: “a small, open container used for drinking.” But can the concept of a cup really grasp all the details of an object that we call a cup? I can use the same “cup” as a paperweight, as a musical instrument (it sounds good…