Revisiting “Flour Flour”

In a recent discussion with a Facebook friend, he criticized Paul Tillich’s theology as nonsensical, particularly regarding Tillich’s assertion that “God does not exist. He is being-itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore, to argue that God exists is to deny him.” My friend’s dismissal of Tillich’s statement is understandable; the complexity of such ideas can often lead to confusion. The Diamond Sutra even cautions that many readers may lose their minds trying to grasp its teachings, highlighting that Buddhist logic can appear nonsensical to the untrained eye. True understanding requires a discerning perspective.

This conversation brings to mind a metaphor often used by my late teacher, Professor Heng-yueh Li. He likened discussing ultimate reality to trying to mold flour with the very flour used as the medium. In Chinese folk art, flour is skillfully shaped into intricate sculptures — representing men, monkeys, dragons, and even characters from Journey to the West. While flour is versatile and pliable, it cannot mold itself. No matter how talented the artist, the material cannot shape its own form. This paradox illustrates the limits of language and understanding when grappling with ultimate reality.

Just as flour cannot mold itself, language — our primary means of communication — struggles to fully capture or define itself. When we consult a dictionary to understand…