Zen 1
I want to talk a little about my use of the word zen, just a little here because I could go on too much about Buddhism. I like to think my use of the word is the same as it is in “ZAMM” but I have no right to say that – I don’t know what Pirsig thinks. We don’t as a rule look at our minds, if something pops up it is ours – a thought we have had, an idea we have had. I don’t mean this in a unique way, that the idea is my property but I mean it that I as my mind have had the idea. In our minds all kinds of thoughts and ideas jumble about. We experience something, there is a thought idea as a consequence. We look out the window, we see a picture of what we have looked at, and maybe we have thoughts or ideas as a consequence of that picture. This is normal, normal mind, happens to everyone.
But mind is not just this, this is not the mind that anyone is averse to. What if all of those thoughts ideas and consequences of experience could just fall away, what would we be left with? Anything? It is that which is left that I am calling zen or zen mind, when Pirsig discusses quality I think he wants to find that zen of quality. Why should anyone be afraid or averse to this?
