Give a definite name to Deity, He would be no more than what the name implies.  The Deity under the name of Brahman necessarily differs from the Being under the appellation of Jehovah, just as the Hindu differs from the Jew.  In like manner the Being designated by God necessarily differs from One named Amitabha or from Him entitled Allah.  To give a name to the Deity is to give Him tradition, nationality, limitation, and fixity, and it never brings us nearer to Him.  Zen’s object of worship cannot be named and determined as God, or Brahman, or Amitabha, or Creator, or Nature, or Reality, or Substance, or the like.  Neither Chinese nor Japanese masters of Zen tried to give a definite name to their object of adoration.  They now called Him That One, now This One, now Mind, now Buddha, now Tathagata, now Certain Thing, now the True, now Dharma-nature, now Buddha-nature, and so forth.  Tung Shan[FN#141] (To-zan) on a certain occasion declared it to be “A Certain Thing that pillars heaven above and supports the earth below; dark as lacquer and undefinable; manifesting itself through its activities, yet not wholly comprisable within them.”  So-kei[FN#142] expressed it in the same wise:  “There exists a Certain Thing, bright as a mirror, spiritual as a mind, not subjected to growth nor to decay.”  Huen Sha (Gen-sha) comparing it with a gem says:  “There exists a bright gem illuminating through the worlds in ten directions by its light."[FN#143]

[FN#141] Tung Shan Luh (To-zan-roku, ‘Sayings and Doings of Ta-zan’) is one of the best Zen books.

[FN#142] So-kei, a Korean Zenist, whose work entitled Zen-ke-ki-kwan is worthy of our note as a representation of Korean Zen.

[FN#143] Sho-bo-gen-zo.

This certain thing or being is too sublime to be named after a traditional or a national deity, too spiritual to be symbolized by human art, too full of life to be formulated in terms of mechanical science, too free to be rationalized by intellectual philosophy, too universal to be perceived by bodily senses; but everybody can feel its irresistible power, see its invisible presence, and touch its heart and soul within himself.  “This mysterious Mind,” says Kwei Fung (Kei-ho), “is higher than the highest, deeper than the deepest, limitless in all directions.  There is no centre in it.  No distinction of east and west, and above and below.  Is it empty?  Yes, but not empty like space.  Has it a form?  Yes, but has no form dependent on another for its existence.  Is it intelligent?  Yes, but not intelligent like your mind.  Is it non-intelligent?  Yes, but not non-intelligent like trees and stone.  Is it conscious?  Yes, but not conscious like you when waking.  Is it bright?  Yes, but not bright like the sun or the moon.”  To the question, “What and who is Buddha?” Yuen Wu (En-go) replied:  “Hold your tongue:  the mouth is the gate of evils!” while Pao Fuh (Ho-fuku) answered to the same question:  “No skill of art can picture Him.”  Thus Buddha is unnamable, indescribable, and indefinable, but we provisionally call Him Buddha.