very forcefulsocial criticism and "digging of the universe" such as one may find in thepoetry of Ginsberg and Snyder, and, rather unevenly, in Kerouac. But, as Iknow it, it is always a shade too self-conscious, too subjective, and toostrident to have the flavor of Zen. It is all very well for thephilosopher, but when the poet (Ginsberg) says--livein the physical worldmoment to momentI must write downevery recurring thought--stop every beating secondthis is too indirect and didactic for Zen, which would rather hand you thething itself without comment.The sea darkens;The voices of the wild ducksAre faintly white.Furthermore, when Kerouac gives his philosophical final statement, "I don'tknow. I don't care. And it doesn't make any difference"--the cat is out ofthe bag, for there is a hostility in these words which clangs withself-defense. But just because Zen truly surpasses convention and itsvalues, it has no need to say "To hell with it," nor to underline withviolence the fact that anything goes.Now the underlying Protestant lawlessness of beat Zen disturbs the squareZennists very seriously. For square Zen is the Zen of established traditionin Japan with its clearly defined hierarchy, rigid discipline, and itsspecific tests of satori. More particularly, it is the kind of Zen adoptedby Westerners studying in Japan, who will before long be bringing it backhome. But there is an obvious difference between square Zen and thecommon-or-garden squareness of the Rotary Club or the Presbyterian Church.It is infinitely more imaginative, sensitive and interesting. But it isstill square because it is a quest for the right spiritual experience, fora satori which will receive the stamp (inka) of approved and establishedauthority. There will even be certificates to hang on the wall.I see no real quarrel with either extreme. There was never a spiritualmovement without its excesses and distortions. The experience of awakeningwhich truly constitutes Zen is too timeless and universal to be injured.The extremes of beat Zen need alarm no one since, as Blake said, "the foolwho persists in his folly will become wise." As for square Zen,"authoritative" spiritual experiences have always had a way of wearingthin, and thus of generating the demand for something genuine and uniquewhich needs no stamp.I have known followers of both extremes to come up with perfectly clearsatori experiences, for since there is no real "way" to satori the way youare following makes very little difference.But the quarrel between the extremes is of great philosophical interest,being a contemporary form of the ancient dispute between salvation by worksand salvation by faith, or between what the Hindus called the ways of themonkey and the cat. The cat--appropriately enough--follows the effortlessway, since the mother cat carries her kittens. The monkey follows the hardway, since the baby monkey has to hang on to its mother's hair. Thus forbeat Zen there must be no effort, no discipline, no artificial striving toattain satori or to be anything but what one is. But for square Zen therecan be no true satori without years of meditation-practice under the sternsupervision of a qualified master. In seventeenth-century Japan these twoattitudes were approximately typified by the great masters Bankci andHakuin, and it so