REFLECTION ON A KOAN BY CHRIST
Seed Sown in Four Types of Ground
This is a seminal parable, often retold (Matt
13:3-23). It is notable for the fact that it is one of the times Christ is
asked “Why do you teach in parables?” He replied, “The
knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but
not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance.
Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. This is why I
speak to them in parables: Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they
do not hear or understand.”
How wonderfully Zen, and how koan-like: “Whoever
does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.”
Not surprisingly, over the millennia Christian
scholars have debated the meaning of this teaching. Indeed, it is often simply
labelled as a “difficult saying” with suggestions that perhaps we are not meant
to understand what it means. Yet other scholars note that whereas Matthew and
Mark (4:25) both have this phrase “even what he has will be taken from him,”
Luke has a variant, “whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has will be
taken from him” (Luke 8:18).
These scholars argue that Mark and Matthew got
confused, or simply failed at accurate translations, and that Luke’s revised
wording is merely a clarification of what Jesus actually said. They base their
argument on what they see as the obviously nonsensical nature of the version
that appears in both Mark and Matthew: the logic goes, if the earlier two
versions don’t make sense then Luke was just adding sense where sense was
needed. The trouble is, there is no actual evidence for this, nor does it
explain why both Mark and Matthew have the same phrase – why, in these scholar’s
view of things, would Mark and Matthew both make the same ‘mistake?’
Of course, it’s a nice side-step to the
teaching to say, “well what Jesus obviously really meant is that to those who
have nothing even what he thinks he has will be taken away.” After all, now the
teaching makes sense, and refocuses the message on people believing they have
something when they in fact do not. And because they only thought they had it,
therefore of course it is taken away (because they don’t actually really have it
…). Which when we unpack the Luke version like this helps us to realize that this
was not what Jesus was teaching. Luke was not merely ‘clarifying’ what Mark and
Matthew should have written.
A further blow to these scholar’s theory that
Luke was clarifying what Jesus ‘really’ said when he write 8:18, the problem
for them is that at 19:26 Luke then goes on to put in the mount of Jesus the
following: “but the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken away
from him.” So much for the simplistic theory Luke was clarifying by adding in
the “what he thinks he has.”
Christ has thus tag-line of to those with nothing even that will be taken away in a total of 3-4 parables and sayings: The Ten Servants and the Ten Minas, and The Three Servants given Talents are two notable others. Indeed, given how often this core teaching appears in his parables, we can assume he saw it as an important message.
One
who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away
So,
what does this phrase mean? Again, this seems to be one of the most koan-like statements
Jesus is reported to have said, and he is reported as saying it several times.
Some insight into the first century Jewish meaning behind this phrase may be
gained from considering Talmud writings. As KJ Went has observed, the following
is a well-known Talmudic writing:
“A mortal can put something into an
empty vessel but not into a full one, but the Holy One, blessed be He, is not
so, He puts more into a full vessel but not into an empty one."
(Babylonian Talmud, Berakôth, 40a; Sukkah 46a)[1]
Instantly, the Zen
“Cup of Tea” koan comes to mind:
Nan-in, a
Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868–1912), received a university
professor who came to inquire about Zen. Nan-in served tea. He poured his
visitor’s cup full, and then kept on pouring. The professor watched the
overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. “It is overfull. No more
will go in!” “Like this cup,” Nan-in said, “you are full of your own opinions
and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?”
Two different
cultures and traditions, two almost opposite metaphorical images. In one we
have the image of God giving most to someone who’s cup is already overflowing,
and in the other a master teacher who cannot teach someone who is already too
full of ideas, concepts and preconceptions.
The Jewish way
of thinking, though, gives rise to what some have dubbed the “Matthew effect” (otherwise
known as the Matthew principle or the Matthew effect of accumulated advantage).
Stated simply, the effect says that the rich get richer and the poor get
poorer. To those who perform well more tasks and merit are given, to those who under-perform fewer new tasks or rewards are given.
The “Matthew
effect” was coined by Robert K. Merton to describe, for instance, how famous researchers
get more credit for their work than unknown researchers who do essentially the
same work.[2]
Seen simplistically, this appears to be what Christ was teaching: if you work
actively towards building the Kingdom of God on earth then God will favor you
and reward you, whereas if you are lazy or simply refuse to work toward the
Kingdom, then you will fall into God’s disfavor and not be rewarded in life.
But the
teaching is deeper than that and is ultimately a teaching about dualism versus
non-dualism. It is both the joy and the
challenge of Christ’s parables and sayings that more often than not they can be
read on at least two different levels. Here with these several related parables
is no exception. At the surface level of understanding, the teachings say that
if you work towards establishing the Kingdom of Heaven (on earth) then God with
reward you. The harder you work, the more ‘full’ you are of such work, the more
you will be rewarded. There’s some similarity to a more simplistic view of
karma: you do good then good will happen to you. The more good you do the more
you benefit. Again, this is a simplistic view of karma, not an accurate one.
But the deeper
teaching goes to Christ’s message about dualistic versus non-dualistic thinking
and action. Throughout so many of his parables and sayings, Christ keeps coming
back to common themes: develop don’t know mind, the mind of wonder of a child
(childlike not childish), align your will with God’s will (that is, realize
your true self, your Christ nature, your oneness with the ground of being),
reject attachment to material things, and so on.
While the two approaches (Zen and Jewish
wisdom) may at first seem to be at odds—one teaching your cup must be empty,
the other that it must be full—they are in fact both addressing essentially the
same teaching. Insight into how this can be is gained from appreciating that a
core part of Christ’s teaching was the practice of kenosis, or “self-emptying.”
Kenosis (or
rather the verb form kenóō) is mentioned five times in the New
Testament (Ro.4:14, 1Co.1:17, 9:15, 2Co.9:3, Phil.2:7) with exponents of Christ’s
“self-emptying” core practice using the text of Philippians (2:7) which
describes Christ emptying himself of his own will and filling himself with God’s
will. This is Christ’s teaching, mentioned elsewhere in here, that a key goal
of following Christ’s “The Way” was to align your will with God’s will, thereby
becoming a son (or daughter) of God.
Another way to think of this is that this kenosis is
an overcoming of ego-based behavior and thought, a transformation from
dualistic (ego-based) being to non-dualistic being. An emptying yourself of
your “self” (with a small s) and filling yourself with your true “Self” (with a
large S). The simple truth is that as you enter into non-dual consciousness then
your entire being simultaneously becomes totally empty (of self, ego, dualism),
and yet by the very fact of being thus ‘empty’ is therefore totally full. Non-dual
consciousness cannot be partial—it is full to overflowing at all times since it
is, after all, awakening.
To evoke a modern parable, it is like the woman who went around
with extremely dark glasses on that turned her world dark and monochromatic, and
blinkers that cut out most of her field of vision. And then one sunny
mid-summer day, the woman took off her glasses and removed the blinkers. In
that moment she went from being full of a dark, limited view of the world to be
filled with light, color, expanse of vision.
The spiritual transformation from ego based, dualistic being
to non-dualistic fully awake being is like this. But it isn’t the end of the journey:
there is then the integration of the dual and the non-dual. To draw the parallel
of a compass, realizing non-dual consciousness is like getting to 180—but our
journey doesn’t end until we get all the way back round to 360, having fully integrated
the dual and non-dual (or in Zen terms, the “absolute” and the “relative”—but more
on that later and elsewhere in this and subsequent books).
Let’s look again at the core teaching Christ is reported to
have used in more than one parable: “as for the one who has nothing, even what he
has will be taken away.”
In teaching my students as we work on koan
introspection I caution them to look out for “the hook.” Many koans have at least
one hook, and often there is a core hook. What form this hook takes varies koan
to koan, but in general it is the part of the text that is designed to draw the
intellect in. In other cases, it may be just a red herring or deliberately
misleading, or even downright false, statement. But the intellect is drawn to it as if a moth to a flame.
Here in what Christ taught I would suggest the hook is the
word “has.” Elsewhere in his parables and sayings, Christ focuses on a core
part of following “The Way” is to not be attached to material possessions. He
speaks of becoming like little children in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven
(within), and of how it is harder for a rich man to achieve this state of
consciousness than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. And
elsewhere still he teaches his followers to look at whose face is on a coin: “Give
to Caesar things that are Caesar’s and give to God that which is God’s.”
These are all part of Christ’s core teaching on attachment,
which is also a core part of the Buddha’s teaching, too. The teaching goes like
this: so long as you think there is a “you” (or “I”) that can “have” things you
will not be able to realize your Christ Nature/Buddha Nature. To believe you “have”
things is central to dualist thinking, and a core illusion that keeps us from being
awake to who we truly are.
Let's close by returning to the core teaching: To one who has nothing, even that will be taken away.
Sit with that. Having nothing, having that taken away. What does this mean?
