Living mostly in the world of form, I have little familiarity with the formless. But at times I wonder if that is really the case. How much of my life is lived just outside the edge of consciousness, just beyond the corner of form? We chant the Prajna Paramita several times a week. In it — That which is form is emptiness, that which is emptiness, form. (cf. Commentary by Venerable Zasep Tulku Rinpoche).
John W.M. Krummel writes about yū and mu (being and nothing, form and formlessness):
The gate to dooryard is closed. Sheltering in place (a good name for hermitage) serves as a novitiate of sorts for the many, few of whom would voluntarily choose it. There is a split between the anxious and the skeptical as to what this current state of affairs means or portends.
I read, take walks, read numbers to worker’s comp numbers cruncher, eat peanut butter and jam on toasted english muffin, take morning coffee, do silent sitting, listen to medieval chants and music, and wonder.
About the root of reality.
And this interchanging spate of time.
We move, uncertainly, through.
John W.M. Krummel writes about yū and mu (being and nothing, form and formlessness):
Being and Nothing, Form and Formlessness
Nishida often characterizes the distinction between being and nothing in terms of the cultural contrast of West and East. In the preface to Hatarakumono kara mirumono e(『働くものから見るものへ』 ; From the Working to the Seeing) of 1927, he contrasts the “brilliant development of Western civilization that takes form as being…” and “the root of Eastern culture that harbors within itself that which sees the form of the formless and hears the sound of the soundless” (Z3 255) — a formlessness that has nurtured the traditions of the East. The distinction he makes here between West and East is that between form (keisō 形相, katachi 形) and formlessness. Being (yū) corresponds to form and the nothing corresponds to the formless. Beings accordingly are what are present in determinate form, contrasted and differentiated from one another. In Tetsugaku no konpon mondai (『哲学の根本問題』; Fundamental Problems of Philosophy) of 1933-34, Nishida reiterates this contrast by stating that the thought of being is at the root of Western culture while the thought of the nothing is at the root of Eastern culture. (Z6 348) Here as well, reality for the West is grounded in being qua form, while reality for the East is grounded in the nothing as formless. Because the European tradition conceives the root of reality to be being (yū) or the “possession of form” (yūkei 有形), it prioritizes “the form-possessing [katachiarumono 形あるもの], the determinate [genteiseraretamono 限定せられたもの], as reality [jitsuzai 実在].” (Z6 335-36) On the premise that “something cannot be born from nothing” (ex nihilo nihil fit), the ancient Greeks came to conceive of the source of all beings in terms of a constant and unchanging primordial being. The prime example here would be the Platonic ideas serving as principles of the actual world, and among which the ultimate source would be the “idea of the Good.” The Platonic concept of the idea (ἰδέα) etymologically means “form” (eidos, εἶδος), which also literally means the “look” of a thing, and hence that which can be objectified in its visibility to the eye, or by extension, its intelligibility. In Nishida’s view, ancient Greek philosophy that became the source of Western culture took form in this sense as the ground of what is real. By contrast, the Eastern tradition takes a certain formlessness or non-substantiality — as in the Buddhist sense of the emptiness of substance (Skt. śūnyatā, Jp. kū 空; Skt. nihsvabhāva) — to be the source of everything. Nishida makes the same contrast in 1940 in Nihon bunka no mondai (『日本文化の問題』; The Problem of Japanese Culture) when he speaks of Western antiquity as conceiving the root of reality to be being (yū) and the formed (yūkei 有形), and Eastern antiquity as conceiving the root of reality to be the nothing (mu) and the formless (mukei 無刑). (Z9 60)
(—from, Chapter 17, Anontology and the Issue of Being and Nothing in Nishida Kitarō, [Published in JeeLoo Liu & Douglas L. Berger (eds.). Nothingness in Asian Philosophy. London: Routledge, by John W.M. Krummel)The wind gusts hard through night. The frightened border collie is finally calm and sleeping after trying to climb onto desk and settling awhile on bed. Rest comes hard for the anxious.
The gate to dooryard is closed. Sheltering in place (a good name for hermitage) serves as a novitiate of sorts for the many, few of whom would voluntarily choose it. There is a split between the anxious and the skeptical as to what this current state of affairs means or portends.
I read, take walks, read numbers to worker’s comp numbers cruncher, eat peanut butter and jam on toasted english muffin, take morning coffee, do silent sitting, listen to medieval chants and music, and wonder.
About the root of reality.
And this interchanging spate of time.
We move, uncertainly, through.




