Research proposal: Michel Foucault and Omori Sogen

In spring 1978 Michel Foucault met and practiced with Omori Sogen Roshi, one of the most important Buddhist Zen masters of the 20th century. My proposed research project is firstly to contextualise this moment within the ongoing conversation between Japanese Zen Buddhism and Continental Philosophy. Secondly, my research will analyse the importance of this event and how this meeting can shed light on Foucault’s later work of the technologies of the self and Omori Sogen Roshi’s mission for internationalizing Zen. Thirdly, I will analyse, from a postcolonial and foucauldian perspective, the spread of contemporary Zen Buddhism in Europe, its misappropriation by the neoliberal tendencies and its emancipatory potential. 
 
Michel Foucault was invited to Japan to give a series of lectures and seminars in the University of Tokyo on April of the above-mentioned year. During his stay in Japan, his second time in the country, Foucault expressed his interest in experiencing Zen Buddhist practice to the cultural attaché of the French embassy. Consequently, an interview with Omori Sogen Roshi was organised. Foucault practiced Zen with Omori Sogen Roshi for a few days, and records of their conversations can be found in the third volume of ́Dit et Écrits ́ (Foucault, 1994) from French sources and in Omori Sogen ́s bibliography (Dogen, 1999) by Hosokawa Dogen from Japanese sources. Foucault never thematised this event but, as Omori Sogen Roshi put it “I think that it is a tremendous thing that Professor Michel Foucault had such a realization in only 20 days. This realization will perhaps have a culturally historic meaning. Believing this, I set a high value on his experience and feel thankful that he came to Japan to do zazen” 

Omori Sogen had intellectual, political, and social links with members of the Kyoto School. The Kyoto School of Philosophy is arguably one of the most significant philosophical movements of the 20th century. As a result of the Kyoto School’s interest in establishing a conversation with European philosophy, they developed a highly original philosophical work with its roots in Zen Buddhism. Although Western scholarship on the Kyoto School has grown steadily over recent years, it is far from reflecting the importance of this group to the history of world philosophy. One of the purposes of my proposed research project is to vindicate the importance of these Japanese philosophers and the relevance of their meditative practice to their philosophy.
There are several known links between Omori Sogen and members of the Kyoto School. Hisamatsu Shinichi, a member of the Kyoto School and one of the most famous students of Nishida Kitaro, founder of the school, was one of Omori Sogen’s mentors and had a great influence on him (Dogen, 1999). In addition, after a very positive review of Omori Sogen’s book, D.T. Suzuki and Omori became friends. Suzuki, a close friend of Nishida and a figure close to the School, held Omori’s talent in very high esteem, to the point that he recommended him

to guide the Crown Prince of Japan in his Zen training. Omori Roshi also published several articles in books and journals edited by D.T. Suzuki and Nishitani Keijii. (Omori, 1968) I feel certain that there were further connections; therefore one line of my research will be to collect further evidence and to determine the nature of these links.
The dialogue with European philosophy that had already been established by the Kyoto School, prior to the encounter between Foucault and Omori Sogen, had Heidegger as its main European point of reference. Heidegger, himself, had a great interest in East Asian religions and philosophies. He shared this interest with many of his contemporaries, such as Karl Jaspers, and could satisfy his curiosity thanks to his many students of Chinese and Japanese origin, and early translations of East Asian classics. (Lin, 2009) Several members of the Kyoto School were his students, such as Tanabe Hajime and Nishitani Keijii, and they were strongly influenced by Heideggerian philosophy. Nishitani Keijii also dedicated a great effort to researching the work of Nietzsche and re-reading the Zen tradition through the lens of Heideggerian and Nietzschean philosophy (Nishitani, 1990).
The controversial relationship of Heidegger and East Asian traditions has been already subject of research by scholars, such as Lin Ma (2008) and Reinhold May (1996). On the other hand, Foucault’s relationship with Japan has had little attention from the academic world. Therefore my research will expand the scholarship in this area by addressing this meeting between Foucault and Omori Sogen in the light of the connections already established through the Kyoto School and Heidegger. It will be imperative to ask if the apparent philosophical connections between Zen Buddhism, Heidegger, and Foucault are products of certain metaphysical/philosophical traditions influencing both these philosophers and translators of the Zen classics. Filtering its concepts through translations with heideggerian and foucauldian backgrounds, creating the illusion of connections where there only is the metaphysical tradition reading itself. For this purpose the critical approach to the research material will be built on the experience of the practice, in line with the traditional emphasis of Zen on the practice, as opposed to purely text-based scholar knowledge.
The determinant influence of Heidegger in Foucault, explicitly and specifically in Foucault’s later work, has the shared aim of challenging the Cartesian subject. One of the main aspects I will develop in my research is how this key interest is what connects not only Heidegger and the Kyoto School, but Foucault and, in certain way, Omori Sogen Roshi.
In 1982’s series of lectures at Vermont University Foucault (Foucault, 1990) states: “Perhaps I've insisted too much in the technology of domination and power. I am more and more interested in the interaction between oneself and others and in the technologies of individual domination, the history of how an individual acts upon himself, in the technology of self.”
My research will argue that it was the pursuit of this interest that leads Foucault to Zen. The practice of Zen Buddhism can be seen not only as a clear and structured series of technologies of the self, but a solid philosophical tradition

with a explicit aim to disclose a different self. From a foucauldian perspective, it is a way of resistance to the modern disciplines that produce the Cartesian subject or, in Heideggerian terms, the ‘being of technology’ (Heidegger, 2013). The lesser-known affair with Japanese culture and Zen Buddhism can bring some light to Foucault’s later interests (Foucault, 1988) especially since his research developments were broken by his sadly early death. Indeed, it is possible that there might be texts supporting this research in the Foucault archive newly acquired by the Bibliothèque nationale de France.
It will be of an upmost interest to develop the potentialities that this encounter point has, what could a Zen Buddhist approach to Foucault’s technologies of the self reveal? The Zen disciplines and practices, as producers of an alternative to the Cartesian subject, may answer interesting questions raised by Foucault in his later work, and, as a counterpart, could a Foucauldian analysis of the Zen disciplines and practices reveal something overseen?
These questions, that are central to the proposed research, require a decolonial/postcolonial scrutiny, with an awareness of the political implications. Omori Sogen Roshi had links with the Japanese far right that have been outlined in very different scholarly approaches (Dogen, 1999; Victoria, 2003). This is a problematic aspect that one must address, just as it is also problematic to deal with Heidegger. Foucault’s interest both in Heidegger and Omori Roshi should highlight that, regardless of the politics, there was something of interest in their work. Foucault was correct in both reinforcing the impossibility of separating philosophy, religion and politics but not falling for the fallacy of dismissing an author because of certain political views.
Part of my work would be to find my own place and discourse in the context of the said postcolonial/decolonial analysis. Omori Sogen’s political and religious views have to be taken in the context of Japan having been forced into opening to trade and Western modernity, becoming a colonizer with imperialistic motivations, and then a post-war occupied country. It is also no coincidence that the cultural attaché of the French embassy put Foucault in contact with Omori Sogen, as Omori Roshi was one of the leaders in the internationalization of Zen and opening Zen to the ‘West’. Writers like D.T. Suzuki (Suzuki, 1949) were used as a source of an orientalist discourse, with the backlash of being accused of ‘reverse orientalism’ (Faure, 1995). A critical and decolonial analysis of the issue should shed some light onto this controversial point. This will also provide the theoretical basis to critique contemporary neoliberal appropriations of Buddhist practices such as mindfulness. A rigorous approach is necessary to guard against the decontextualized instrumentalization of the meditative practices born in the Buddhist tradition. Ultimately, it is hoped that one of the outcomes of this research would be a foucauldian outline of the emancipatory potential of Zen Buddhist practice.

Hosokawa, Dogen. Omori Sogen: The Art of a Zen Master. London ; New York: Routledge, 1999.
Faure, Bernard. Chan Insights and Oversights, Princeton University Press, 1996. Foucault, Michel. Religion and Culture. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Foucault, Michel, Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman, and Patrick H. Hutton. Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault. University of Massachusetts Press, 1988.
Foucault, Michel. Dits et écrits (1954-1988), tome III: 1976-1979 Collection Bibliothèque des Sciences humaines, Gallimard, 1994
Heidegger, Martin. On the Way to Language. 1st Harper & Row Pbk. Ed edition. San Francisco: Harper, 2003.
Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology: And Other Essays. Harper, 2013
Nishitani, Keijii. The self-overcoming of Nihilism. State University of New York Press , 1990.
Ma, Lin. Heidegger on East-West Dialogue. London. Routledge, 2009.
May, Reinhard. Heidegger’s Hidden Sources: East-Asian Influences on His Work. London ; New York: Routledge, 1996.
Omori, Sogen. Sanzen Nyumon. Translated by Dogen Hosokawa and Roy Yoshimoto. Boston, Mass: Tuttle Publishing, 2002.
Omori, Sogen. Zen to Budo.

Daisetz T. Suzuki and Nishitani, eds., Zen, in Vol. 5,

Zen and Culture Chikuma Shobo, 1968.

Suzuki, D.T Essays in Zen Buddhism. Grove Press, 1949.

Victoria, Brian Daizen. Zen War Stories. Routledge, 2003.

Goldsmiths University Workshop: Positive Confrontation

In 1978, after twenty days practicing Zen under Omori Sogen Roshi, Michel Foucault stated: “I found a new relationship between mind and body”. My intention is to give a glimpse of a research methodology that can reveal, as Zen Buddhism did for Foucault, an alternative to the Cartesian self. This session will work on concepts such as ‘other’, ‘self’ and ‘confrontation’ through practice. The workshop will take the structure of an initiation into a Karate lesson, with a focus on sight and frontality. The first motto repeated after every Goju Ryu Karate training, “Respect Others” will guide us in our attempt to find what a “respectful confrontation” might be and what philosophical potential might have this concept within the martial practice. The session will be followed by a short group discussion on the positive potential of confrontation.

In our first session we will practice around the first Shotokan Karate kata, Heian Shodan.

My perspective on the practice was deeply inspired by Terayama Tanchu sensei, direct disciple and successor of Omori Sogen Roshi.

There is some documentation of Foucault's experience in Japan; the quote provided can be found in Omori Sogen Roshi's biography by Hosokawa Dogen. I also think that Foucault's Howison lectures at Berkeley would be very useful and relevant to contextualize the workshop.

The Cartesian Problem of the Body: an introduction

Martin Heidegger and Nishitani Keijii

My work always takes place between disciplines. I firmly believe that the most interesting things happen at the borders of what is stable and safe. I do not see myself as a master of any of these areas, but a bridge-builder. By walking across the frontiers of philosophy, literature, arts and martial disciplines I have tried to find ways that connect and enrich these different practices. The most powerful foundation I have found so far to all of them is the body.

The body is, in my opinion, the neglected foundation of the self in the Cartesian, rationalist and idealist traditions of philosophy. Since Descartes conceived the body as a machine, controlled by the soul, and focused the ‘sum’ in the ‘cogito’, the body became a problem, a burden, an obstacle, and it is still seen as such for most schools of philosophy to this day.

For the martial arts there is only the body. Self-development through the body is one of the roots of the Sino-Japanese martial disciplines. I am aware that in my research on philosophy of the mind my conceptions of the body are very different to those of my colleagues because of my martial arts background.

This drew me to Japanese culture and philosophy, how they understand the European schools of philosophy, and more specifically to the Kyoto School. Not very surprisingly, they were very interested not only in German idealism and romanticism but in figures critical of the Enlightenment tradition, such as Nietzsche, Heidegger or Jünger. Some of them, like Tanabe Hajime and Nishitani Keijii even became students of Heidegger. But I also noticed a deep difference. All these philosophers belonged to the Zen Buddhist tradition.

Authors like Nietzsche - and following him Heidegger - had a different conception of the body than the Cartesian one. The body is present in many passages of Nietzsche’s work, but is not fully developed as a theme. The same notions of the body are present in Heidegger’s text, but they are barely mentioned.

Nishitani Keijii was one of the most important philosophers of the Kyoto School. He was student of both Heidegger and Nishida Kitaro, the founder of the school. He was deeply influenced by Nietzsche, too, and he made a revealing study of Nietzsche’s conception of the body in his book The Self-Overcoming of Nihilism. This book is revealing not only of Nietzsche’s position, but also of Keijii’s interests and problems. In his works the body is not much mentioned, but fully present; the difference to his German counterparts is his perfection and consistency. This is because in the Zen sect the body-mind relationship is a central theme. It is fully developed theoretically and practically in a holistic method. This methodology leads to a certain conception of the body, where it is the body itself who speaks. When Keijii mentions the body he uses, in a very Heideggerian way, a neologism. He renames it the ´mind-and-body´ (in the English translation, obviously). He himself states that this ´mind-and-body´ is the same as what Nishida Kitaro called the ´Historical Body´. Therefore, in the Kyoto School’s interpretation the body-mind relationship is not essential but existential. This means, there is not one essential relationship, but a process that can lead to certain unity (or fail in the path of obtaining it).

Influenced by this perspective the artist and monk Omori Sogen developed an interesting and unique practice. He was personal friend of some of the Kyoto School philosophers, and a Zen adept himself. He linked his shodo (Japanese calligraphy and painting) with his kenjutsu (Japanese traditional swordmanship) and his Rinzai Zen Buddhism meditative practice. He believed that there was a deep connection between each of these disciplines, and that practicing them together in a unified method would enable him to master all of them. On the top of this, he was a firm believer in the internationalization of his disciplines. He was the founder of the Daihonzan Chozen-ji in Hawaii, the first Japanese Zen Buddhist temple outside of Japan.

Omori Sogen and Terayama Tanchu

When in 2005 I met Terayama Tanchu sensei, Omori Sogen’s disciple and leader of his school after he passed away in 1994, something caught my attention. By a friend´s invitation, I attended a Shodo workshop, and what I found was very different to what I had expected. We did bodily preparation that included breathing exercises as one of the key components. I recognised the exercises immediately from my experiences in martial arts. When the master painted, I was shocked by the precise use of the body and the breathing technique. As far as I was aware, he was using what is called ibuki, a basic breathing technique used in martial practice, the same projected in fighting.

Afterwards, when a couple of months later I joined the school and practiced zazen and kenjutsu, everything became clearer for me. The breathing techniques ibuki and Nogare were the base of the whole practice, the bodily foundation of the ken, the zen and the sho. And the starting point for any theoretical explanation.

Back in Europe, I tried to make sense of all these experiences for my own practice. The obvious analogue in philosophy was Michel Focault. He was deeply influenced by Heidegger and Nietzsche, and was very interested in the Japanese experience, to the extent that he practiced zen under Omori Sogen. Sadly he passed away while developing these interests, although they are already very present in his late work the History of Sexuality. Certainly, Foucault was developing the tools to be able to think of a new conception of the body.

Trying to trace a new history for a different body, I look back to the key moment of the early European modernity. Guided by Bakhtin, I found an alternative to Descartes in Rabelais´ idea of the ‘carnavalesque’. The excessive body, the eating, the scatology, the full embodiment. Guided by Ortega y Gasset, I found yet more inspiration in Velázquez, the fencing painter, the painter who painted with a bold attitude, whose body movements can be seen in his brush marks, the painter who painted the dwarfs of the court in a carnavalesque, yet realist, manner, portraying the dignity of their disgraced bodies. The potential for a new body has always been there, and with it the possibility of a conversation between the European and the Japanese traditions, a debate fruitful for both of them. It could be antedote for the deadend that both analytic and continental philosophies have been in for the last century.

This problem was already noticed by people such as Ernst Jünger, a friend and peer of Heidegger. His criticism of the machine and dehumanization, which influenced the more widely known work by Walter Benjamin, was profusely read and discussed by the philosophers of the Kyoto School.

Nishitani Keijii on philosophy and Omori Sogen on art and religion are unique figures for a European researcher. They lived in a key historical moment for Japan and the world. They had a very strong relationship with European philosophy. They were in contact with key philosophers like Husserl, Heidegger or Foucault. They were very aware and well trained on their own tradition. They had an extremely original and successful practice, and they noticed what they personally, and Japanese culture more widely, could provide to the world. Their work presents a great opportunity to build those necessary bridges between Japanese and European philosophy. 

The Cartesian Problem of the Body by Juan Enrique Ordóñez Arnau is licensed under a Creative Commons