I wonder why there are no bad books on Buddhism, or Zen, or even “mindfulness” for that matter. Has anyone else noticed that? It seems quite common to see complaints about a novelist’s work, or even that of poets. Their attempts at creativity can receive crushing reviews. I have even seen works rejected due to the author’s use of commas. But, somehow, no books on Zen and Buddhism seem to receive this treatment? This is strange. Why does this happen?
My two cents worth: People like comfortable truths. Things they can relate to. That can confirm their prejudices and predilections. They especially like those insights that only stretch them in comfortable, reassuring ways. This explains the rise in zenfotainment™. That is, books offering comfortable platitudes that fit the broad expectations of our time and culture; books that don’t really challenge us. Dharma undiluted, undressed, not camouflaged with reassuring stories, without the frilly bits, does not sell many books. Dharma is subtle. It is also very simple, very direct, and uncompromising; uncompromising in the manner of the breeze through the bedroom window, and birdsong at dusk.
Dr Magid is an engaging writer, and throughout Nothing is Hidden he makes some good and interesting points; points any Zen teacher worth her salt would make, however his presentation of koan practice and what this represents is compromised by superficiality. It is zenfotainment™ .
Nothing is Hidden does not seem to offer anything more substantial than what has appeared in his previous books. In addition his comments on koan practice suggest that he is not familiar, nor proficient with traditional koan training. As a result he misunderstands and misrepresents this practice.
Koan practice is experiential. It is challenging. It requires an honesty of inquiry, and courage to set aside our usual cognitive crutches. It strikes to the heart of the stories we tell about ourselves and the world. In contrast Dr Magid simply makes up more stories about koan, when an important function of this practice is to simply set these stories aside.
Admittedly the experiential nature of koan practice makes it is very difficult to write about it in any meaningful way for a general audience without causing confusion, or ending up being misleading. Writing about koan practice is like trying to explain to someone how to balance when riding a bike. Your explanation will never really explain how to do it, but once a person experiences this for themselves they understand immediately what you were trying to say. However in Nothing is Hidden Dr Magid does not seem so much to lead us to experience but to try to explain koan. His approach appears to be largely intellectual. He tends to psychologize koan study, adding a layer of intellectual or verbal gloss to it that is counter to the cutting through of bullshit and story that koan study requires.
In short he fails to tell us much about koans, or the psychology of koans. Nothing is Hidden failed to address how mainstream psychology (academic psychology, experimental psychology, and yes Cognitive Behavioural Psychology) might relate to koan, and koan practice. Strangely while attempting to psychologize koan study that broad psychological view of koan work was clearly not the purpose of the book (which is just as well), however the title can give a misleading impression. Therefore readers should be wary regarding their expectations.
Koans are difficult to grasp for those not familiar with working with them. In the best parts of the book Dr Magid points to how working with koans can help us to loosen the hold of our conceptualised self; the work of any good Zen teacher. However, this is not the main thrust of the book. That appears to be firstly to describe how koan practice is deficient. I believe he fails to make this argument. His evidence seems to be that some Zen teachers are manipulative self-centred assholes (not his words but it is the gist of the argument) therefore koan study is flawed. His second and possibly main point is that he believes Zen teachers would benefit, or indeed need psychotherapy in order to offset the deficiencies in their training and character. I found this latter idea surprising as I was unaware that psychotherapists were less prone to character faults, and the manipulation of others than the rest of us. And I have met a few over the years.
Reading this book, and thinking of some other popular writing on Zen made me wonder whether any therapist should become a Zen teacher. There seems to be a real risk of therapists trying to psychologize koan work, and Zen. To make them fit within our view of the world and how things work. It seemed to be what was happening in this case. And this is inappropriate. The result was neither psychology or Zen, nor a hybrid of the two. I got the impression that Dr Magid was struggling to integrate two traditions he held dear, and he failed. At times I felt the case he was making demonstrated what he might call the joint “curative fantasies” that koan work will somehow automatically makes us different, or better, and that psychotherapy would do the same. As he points in the book, at least in relation to koan practice, that ain't necessarily so. Koan practice can certainly allow, support, facilitate, and prompt such transformations, but I think you also need to work at it. Psychotherapy may be helpful for some, and not for others. But insights alone do not change people. Changing what you do is what is required.
As a therapist myself I can understand this impulse to try and understand the practice in terms of psychology and theory. How does one very important aspect of my life relate to the other? How do I truly integrate this practice in to my life? Or, much less helpfully in Dr Magid’s case how do I understand Zen practice in intellectual terms, terms that fit with my world view and intellectual heritage. The result of adding of more stories about our practice is certainly unhelpful. It is not Zen.
We are the fruits of our experience, our practice, our training. Not just our Zen or Buddhist training. Dr Magid's training is evident in his writing. Probably as mine is here. Readers unfamiliar with the wider world of Zen and the wider world of psychology should be aware that his is one view, and a very limited one at that.
Nothing is Hidden will not be helpful in understanding koans for those already familiar with koan practice, and it will be confusing and unhelpful for those new to koans, and to Zen. Which is a shame as Dr Magid's other work seems to reflect a kind and knowledgeable teacher, most of the time.
If you are interested in the “psychology” of koan practice I suggest The Zen Teachings of Huang Po, or the Roaring Stream, or perhaps even Zen Master Raven. But leave this book alone.